Martinek v. Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce

Martinek v. Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce

The motion judge correctly required the appellant to tender evidence of a genuine issue for trial; the bank's uncontradicted affidavit established that write-offs from settlements are reported as R9 under industry standards and the settlement expressly permitted the bank not to report in any particular way, so reporting as R9 did not breach the settlement and summary judgment dismissing the action was proper.

Citation
2009 ONCA 270
Parties
Plaintiff (appellant): Tibor Martinek; Defendant (respondent): Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce
Court
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
30 March 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision on Appeal From Summary Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Settlement Agreement, Credit Rating R9, Interpretation of 'bad Debt', Consumer Reporting Act
Source Language
English
Civil Litigation Contract Consumer Protection Credit Reporting Summary Judgment Settlement Agreement Credit Rating R9 Interpretation of 'bad Debt' +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tibor Martinek

Plaintiff (appellant)

Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce

Defendant (respondent)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision on Appeal From Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the motion judge applied the correct test for summary judgment and allocated the onus correctly
  2. 2 Whether a write-off pursuant to a settlement constitutes a 'bad debt' for the purposes of credit reporting and whether reporting as R9 breached the settlement or Consumer Reporting Act

Ratio Decidendi

The motion judge correctly required the appellant to tender evidence of a genuine issue for trial; the bank's uncontradicted affidavit established that write-offs from settlements are reported as R9 under industry standards and the settlement expressly permitted the bank not to report in any particular way, so reporting as R9 did not breach the settlement and summary judgment dismissing the action was proper.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Costs fixed at $7,500 inclusive of disbursements and G.S.T.