373041 Ontario Limited v. 373041 Ontario Limited v. King Reed & Associates Inc.

373041 Ontario Limited v. 373041 Ontario Limited v. King Reed & Associates Inc.

The motions judge considered the refusals and, based on the record before him, reasonably declined to draw an adverse inference; given the record and the appellants' failure to file affidavits and concession of no agency, summary judgment dismissing the appellants' actions against these respondents was correctly entered and is affirmed on appeal.

Citation
2014 ONCA 184
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: 373041 Ontario Limited; Plaintiff/appellant: Kurt Pieckenhagen; Plaintiff/appellant: Julita Pieckenhagen; Plaintiff/appellant: Julita-Luise Pieckenhagen; Plaintiff/appellant: Nicole Pieckenhagen; Plaintiff/appellant: Vera Pieckenhagen; Defendant/respondent: King Reed & Associates Inc.; Defendant/respondent: King Reed & Associates LP; Defendant/respondent: King Reed & Associates; Defendant/respondent: Granite Global Solutions; Defendant/respondent: Granite Global Solutions Inc.; Defendant/respondent: Shaw Satellite G.P. c.o.b. as Shaw Direct; Defendant/respondent: Bell Expressvu Limited Partnership
Court
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
10 March 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil / Appeal From Motion Judge's Summary Judgment Orders
Outcome
Appeals dismissed; motions judge's summary judgment orders affirmed
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Adverse Inference, Agency, Costs
Source Language
English
Defamation Civil Procedure Appeal Summary Judgment Adverse Inference Agency Costs

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

373041 Ontario Limited

Plaintiff/appellant

Kurt Pieckenhagen

Plaintiff/appellant

Julita Pieckenhagen

Plaintiff/appellant

Julita-Luise Pieckenhagen

Plaintiff/appellant

Nicole Pieckenhagen

Plaintiff/appellant

Vera Pieckenhagen

Plaintiff/appellant

King Reed & Associates Inc.

Defendant/respondent

King Reed & Associates LP

Defendant/respondent

King Reed & Associates

Defendant/respondent

Granite Global Solutions

Defendant/respondent

Granite Global Solutions Inc.

Defendant/respondent

Shaw Satellite G.P. c.o.b. as Shaw Direct

Defendant/respondent

Bell Expressvu Limited Partnership

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil / Appeal From Motion Judge's Summary Judgment Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the motions judge erred in failing to draw an adverse inference from refusals on cross-examination
  2. 2 Whether summary judgment was properly granted against the respondents
  3. 3 Whether an agency relationship existed between King Reed and Shaw

Ratio Decidendi

The motions judge considered the refusals and, based on the record before him, reasonably declined to draw an adverse inference; given the record and the appellants' failure to file affidavits and concession of no agency, summary judgment dismissing the appellants' actions against these respondents was correctly entered and is affirmed on appeal.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed; motions judge's summary judgment orders affirmed

Orders

  • Appeals dismissed
  • Costs to the respondents fixed at $25,000 inclusive of disbursements and all applicable taxes, to be allocated equally between the two actions