The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal as moot on the vesting order, upheld the compensation award, denied leave to appeal costs, and awarded no costs.
Application for a stay was dismissed because the appeal and underlying judicial review were of little merit, there was insufficient evidence of irreparable harm, and the balance of convenience favoured the respondents given the appellants' delay and repeated procedural abuses; deference to Justice Hewson's discretionary case management decision warranted upholding the cancellation of the stay.
The trial judge erred in law by treating part of the Richmond proceeds as family property because the appellant held no beneficial interest until sale (resulting trust presumption), which means the Mission Property net proceeds are excluded property; the judge also erred by deducting family mortgage debt from excluded property without s.96 analysis, by awarding retroactive spousal support without applying Kerr factors, and by making a palpable and overriding error in valuing certain chattels; the prospective spousal support determination and income finding were not disturbed.
The court found on the whole of the evidence that the parties separated well before April 2023 and that s.198(2)(b) therefore barred the claimant's Part 5 and Part 7 FLA claims; the term 'order' in s.198(2)(b) includes declaratory relief where the declaration is sought as or will be used as an enforceable remedy, so seeking declarations under Part 5 after the two-year period is barred; the claimant's unjust enrichment claim failed for lack of necessary evidence of deprivation or absence of juristic reason; accordingly the respondent's summary trial application was granted and the claimant's a…
The Court of Appeal upheld summary judgment against Prado, but set aside punitive damages to Capital Canada and sent Steiner’s knowing receipt claim to trial.
The purchase and sale agreement unambiguously required conveyance of 10 acres from PID 20441911; the phrase ‘as designated by the Vendor’ is limited to designating which 10 acres within PID 911 and does not permit substitution of a different property; no genuine issue of material fact defeats the contract claim and North 45’s substitution defence has no real chance of success; plaintiff validly terminated for vendor default and is entitled to repayment of $570,000 with prejudgment interest from February 15, 2022.
The Federal Court disallowed GreenBlue’s overhead deductions on remittal and awarded DeepRoot an accounting of profits, plus prejudgment interest and costs.
The application to add Mixtec as a defendant is dismissed because the proposed amended pleadings fail to particularize the necessary elements of knowing assistance and knowing receipt and lack specific allegations against Mixtec for any conspiracy; the deficiencies render the claims destined to fail and amendment is refused with liberty to reapply on a revised pleading addressing specificity and necessary elements.
The notice of civil claim does not, even assuming its allegations true, plead any interest in the Sagebrush Property or a sufficient nexus between the pleaded causes of action and that property; therefore the CPL was improperly registered and must be cancelled under s.215 LTA; costs to petitioners at Scale B and special costs declined.
The appeal is dismissed because the adjudicator did not commit an error of law: the record contained evidence supporting findings of an intention to contract and the reasonable value of work; the adjudicator properly credited barter to a limited extent; reliance on third‑party estimates and photographs was within his fact‑finding role; fresh evidence was not allowed on appeal; therefore no legal ground justified overturning the Small Claims decisions.