Toronto-Dominion Bank v. Froom

Toronto-Dominion Bank v. Froom

The Court quashed the appellant’s appeals because the impugned orders were not final and therefore not appealable to the Court of Appeal; the proper route for interlocutory relief was the Divisional Court, so this Court lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeals.

Citation
2017 ONCA 998
Parties
Plaintiff (respondent): The Toronto-Dominion Bank; Defendant (appellant): Arthur Scott L. Froom
Court
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
18 December 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Collection / Appeal From Superior Court Interlocutory Orders to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeals quashed for lack of appellate jurisdiction; directions made for costs submissions
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Motion to Strike, Case Management, Appealability, Costs
Source Language
English
Civil Contract Debt Collection Appeal Procedure Summary Judgment Motion to Strike Case Management Appealability +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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Toronto-Dominion Bank

Plaintiff (respondent)

Arthur Scott L. Froom

Defendant (appellant)

Procedural Posture

Civil Collection / Appeal From Superior Court Interlocutory Orders to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the orders under appeal were final and therefore appealable to the Court of Appeal
  2. 2 Whether the Court of Appeal had jurisdiction to hear interlocutory complaints absent a proper Divisional Court route
  3. 3 Whether the appellant’s positions (including that no contracts exist) were finally determined by the orders under appeal

Ratio Decidendi

The Court quashed the appellant’s appeals because the impugned orders were not final and therefore not appealable to the Court of Appeal; the proper route for interlocutory relief was the Divisional Court, so this Court lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeals.

Court Disposition

Appeals quashed for lack of appellate jurisdiction; directions made for costs submissions

Orders

  • Appeals quashed for lack of jurisdiction
  • Bank may deliver costs submissions within 10 days; appellant may respond within 10 days