Rabbani v. Furney

Rabbani v. Furney

The appeal is dismissed because the motion judge did not err in refusing an adjournment, and correctly granted summary judgment: the uncontradicted evidence established the Furneys owed the amounts claimed on the promissory notes and mortgage and there was no genuine issue for trial; awarding no costs against Hashemi was not an error where costs were not sought against him.

Citation
2024 ONCA 943
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: Mohammad Ali Rabbani; Defendant/appellant: Alex Aidan Fitzgerald Furney (also known as Alex Furney); Defendant/appellant: Maryam Furney; Defendant/appellant: Hassan Hashemi
Court
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
23 December 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil / Appeal From Summary Judgment Motion
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Assignment of Debt, Promissory Notes, Mortgage, Costs, Adjournment
Source Language
English
Civil Contract Property Summary Judgment Assignment of Debt Promissory Notes Mortgage Costs +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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mohammad Ali Rabbani

Plaintiff/respondent

Alex Aidan Fitzgerald Furney (also known as Alex Furney)

Defendant/appellant

Maryam Furney

Defendant/appellant

Hassan Hashemi

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Appeal From Summary Judgment Motion

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the motion judge erred in refusing an adjournment
  2. 2 Whether summary judgment was properly granted on promissory notes and a mortgage
  3. 3 Whether the assignment of debts to the respondent was valid and caused prejudice

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the motion judge did not err in refusing an adjournment, and correctly granted summary judgment: the uncontradicted evidence established the Furneys owed the amounts claimed on the promissory notes and mortgage and there was no genuine issue for trial; awarding no costs against Hashemi was not an error where costs were not sought against him.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Summary judgment in favour of the respondent upheld