Ghasempoor v. ICapital Financial Services Corp.

Ghasempoor v. ICapital Financial Services Corp.

The appeal was dismissed because the motion judge did not commit reversible error: appellants received adequate notice, failed to attend or provide credible justification, failed to adduce evidence to substantiate their assertions about the debt amount or damages from the credit report, the summary judgment was appropriate on the uncontested documentary record, and the proposed fresh evidence was available with reasonable diligence and therefore inadmissible to upset the summary judgment.

Citation
2022 ONCA 60
Parties
Plaintiff/defendant by Counterclaim (appellant): Alireza Ghasempoor; Defendant/plaintiff by Counterclaim (respondent): ICapital Financial Services Corp.; Third Party (appellant): Atciti Corp.
Court
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 January 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Summary Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; summary judgment below upheld
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Procedural Fairness, Personal Guarantee, Consumer Credit Report, Service of Process, Fresh Evidence
Source Language
English
Civil Contract Debt Collection Consumer Credit Procedural Law Summary Judgment Procedural Fairness Personal Guarantee +3 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 11
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alireza Ghasempoor

Plaintiff/defendant by Counterclaim (appellant)

ICapital Financial Services Corp.

Defendant/plaintiff by Counterclaim (respondent)

Atciti Corp.

Third Party (appellant)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellants were denied procedural fairness by non-attendance and alleged improper service
  2. 2 Whether the action was suitable for summary judgment or required a trial
  3. 3 Whether the outstanding indebtedness claimed ($82,250) was properly established or was only $51,000 as alleged by appellants

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the motion judge did not commit reversible error: appellants received adequate notice, failed to attend or provide credible justification, failed to adduce evidence to substantiate their assertions about the debt amount or damages from the credit report, the summary judgment was appropriate on the uncontested documentary record, and the proposed fresh evidence was available with reasonable diligence and therefore inadmissible to upset the summary judgment.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; summary judgment below upheld

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Judgment against Alireza Ghasempoor and Atciti Corp. in the amount of 82250 on a joint and several basis affirmed