A collection of judgments of the Superior Court of Justice, primarily released after October 1, 2002, is posted on CanLII. The CanLII website is not an exhaustive source of judgments of the Superior Court of Justice. The official version of the reasons for judgment is the signed original or handwritten endorsement in the court file. In the event that there is a question about the content of a judgment, the original in the court file takes precedence.

Judgments are available in the language provided.

Copies of judgments of the Superior Court of Justice can be obtained by contacting the respective court administrative office where the matter was heard. A photocopy charge is payable. Judgments are also available on a number of subscription based services such as LexisNexis® Quicklaw^TM and WestlawNext® Canada.

Subscribe to the RSS Feeds for Superior Court of Justice Judgments

• Superior Court of Justice Recent Decisions
• Superior Court of Justice Divisional Court Recent Decisions

Superior Court of Justice Recent Decisions

• 2025-07-29 NP Health Clinic Inc. v. 2456192 Ontario Inc., 2025 ONSC 4416 (CanLII)
  Key Words: Lease — Termination of lease — Interlocutory injunction — Landlord sought to terminate lease due to alleged deficiencies in Tenant's insurance coverage — Tenant argued compliance with clause 8.01 of the Lease — Should the interlocutory injunction be set aside, and the lease terminated? — Court found Tenant complied with insurance requirements — Landlord's motion dismissed — Commercial Tenancies Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. L.7, s. 20(8)
  Insurance — Commercial lease — Insurance requirements — Tenant required to maintain specific insurance under clause 8.01 of the Lease — Landlord alleged deficiencies in insurance coverage, including named insured, property insurance, and delivery of policies — Did the Tenant comply with insurance obligations? — Court held Tenant met insurance requirements — Importance of compliance with insurance covenants emphasized
  Lease — Relief from forfeiture — Commercial Tenancies Act — Section 20(8) prohibits relief from forfeiture if insurance requirements are not met — Does section 20(8) preclude relief for the Tenant? — Court found Tenant complied with insurance obligations, rendering section 20(8) inapplicable — Relief from forfeiture not required
• 2025-07-28 Brodie (Estate) v. Moses, 2025 ONSC 4401 (CanLII)
  Key Words: Contracts — Breach of contract — Damages — Agreement of purchase and sale of residential property — Purchaser failed to complete transaction despite extensions — Vendor entitled to damages for shortfall in purchase price and consequential expenses — What damages are recoverable for breach of a real estate purchase agreement? — Vendor entitled to damages placing them in the position they would have been in had the contract been performed
  Obligations — Damages — Reasonableness of expenses — Vendor claimed living expenses, property taxes, and home maintenance costs incurred due to purchaser’s breach — Are these expenses reasonable and recoverable? — Expenses reasonably incurred as a result of the breach are recoverable if they are foreseeable and justified
  Sale — Real estate — Deposit — Purchaser’s deposit and accumulated interest credited against damages — Should the deposit held by the Real Estate Council of Ontario be released to the vendor? — Deposit credited against damages and ordered to be released to the vendor
  Contracts — Pre-judgment interest — Calculation — Pre-judgment interest rate of 4% applied to damages from the date of breach to the date of judgment — How should pre-judgment interest be calculated in a breach of contract case? — Pre-judgment interest calculated based on statutory rate and period of breach
  Civil procedure — Costs — Trial costs and prior costs awards — Costs fixed on a partial indemnity scale — Are trial costs and prior costs awards recoverable? — Costs awarded to the plaintiff, including trial costs and prior costs awards, on a partial indemnity basis
• 2025-07-25 Fisher v. Danilunas, 2025 ONSC 4359 (CanLII)
  Key Words: Estates and trusts — Guardianship — Recognition of foreign orders — Ontario court recognition of UK court order appointing deputies for an incapacitated person — Substitute Decisions Act, 1992, SO 1992, c 30 — Whether foreign guardianship orders can be enforced in Ontario — Framework for balancing autonomy and protection of vulnerable persons — Court recognized UK deputies’ authority to manage property in Ontario — Public policy considerations and procedural safeguards
  International law — Comity — Recognition of foreign court orders — UK court order appointing deputies for an incapacitated person — Real and substantial connection test — Whether foreign in rem orders can be enforced in Ontario — Application of Beals v. Saldanha and Pro Swing Inc. v. Elta Golf Inc. — Court recognized foreign order based on procedural fairness and accountability under UK law
  Rights and freedoms — Autonomy — Vulnerable persons — Substitute Decisions Act, 1992 — Balancing individual autonomy and protection of vulnerable persons — Public policy concerns under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s. 7 — Whether recognition of foreign guardianship orders undermines autonomy — Court found UK process aligned with Ontario’s public policy and Charter values
  Property — Ancillary orders — Access to property in Ontario — Whether foreign deputies can access and manage funds in Ontario without full recognition of foreign order — Court rejected ancillary enforcement without recognition of UK order — Recognition required to authorize deputies to manage over $1.2 million in Ontario assets
  Constitution — Public policy — Enforcement of foreign in rem orders — Balancing competing values of autonomy and protection — Application of Pro Swing Inc. v. Elta Golf Inc. — Broader public policy considerations for in rem orders — Court recognized UK order as consistent with Canadian constitutional values and public policy
• 2025-07-25 Robinson v. Htike, 2025 ONSC 4360 (CanLII)
  Key Words: Civil procedure — Medical examinations — Trial fairness — Defendants sought additional medical examinations of the plaintiff by an orthopedic surgeon and a neurologist — Plaintiff argued the examinations were unnecessary and duplicative — Should the court order the plaintiff to undergo additional medical examinations? — Section 105 of the Courts of Justice Act and Rule 33.01 of the Rules of Civil Procedure empower courts to order such examinations where fairness requires it
  Evidence — Duplicative medical assessments — Defendants argued that additional medical examinations were necessary to address orthopedic and neurological issues not fully covered by prior assessments — Plaintiff contended that the requested examinations duplicated prior expert reports — Are the requested medical examinations duplicative? — Courts must ensure that examinations are not redundant and are necessary for trial fairness
  Health — Cancellation fees — Plaintiff missed a medical appointment due to severe chronic pain — Defendants sought reimbursement of a $3,000 cancellation fee — Should the plaintiff be required to pay the cancellation fee? — Court declined to order payment, citing the plaintiff’s catastrophic injuries and unpredictable pain levels
  Workplace health and safety — Costs of motion — Defendants were successful in their motion for additional medical examinations — Parties agreed that the successful party should be awarded $3,000 in costs — Should the plaintiff pay the defendants’ costs for the motion? — Court ordered the plaintiff to pay $3,000 in costs within 30 days
• 2025-07-25 The Ottawa Hospital v. Hôpitel Inc., 2025 ONSC 4364 (CanLII)
  Key Words: Contracts — Interpretation — Term and end date of contract — Dispute over whether contract term ended in March 2020 or extended to January 2031 — Application of principles of contractual interpretation from Sattva Capital v. Creston Moly — Whether alternative term in contract was vague and unenforceable — Court held that the contract term ended in March 2020 — Governing rule: Contracts must be interpreted with a common-sense approach, considering the factual matrix but ensuring certainty and enforceability
  Contracts — Doctrine of election — Preclusion of inconsistent positions — Respondent initially relied on contract provisions effective from May 2010 but later asserted a different start date for the contract term — Whether respondent’s conduct constituted an election precluding reliance on a later start date — Court held that the doctrine of election at common law applied, binding the respondent to its earlier position — Governing rule: A party is precluded from asserting inconsistent rights after making a clear and communicated election

Superior Court of Justice Divisional Court Recent Decisions

• 2025-07-29 Botbyl v. Heartland Farm Mutual Inc., 2025 ONSC 3349 (CanLII)
  Key Words: Insurance — Relief from forfeiture — Optional accident benefits — Insureds applied to the wrong insurer due to an innocent mistake — Insurer denied benefits under OPCF 47 endorsement — Does section 129 of the Insurance Act allow relief from forfeiture to claim optional benefits? — Relief granted to uphold consumer protection objectives of the SABS — Insurance Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. I.8, s. 129
  Administrative law — Jurisdiction of administrative tribunals — Licence Appeal Tribunal (LAT) — Whether LAT has jurisdiction to grant equitable relief under section 129 of the Insurance Act — Tribunal’s broad statutory authority to decide all questions of law and fact — LAT found to have jurisdiction to apply section 129 in disputes over statutory accident benefits
  Statutory interpretation — Definition of "court" — Whether the term "court" in section 129 of the Insurance Act includes the LAT — Interpretation of consumer protection legislation to achieve remedial objectives — Broad interpretation of "court" to include LAT as the exclusive forum for statutory accident benefits disputes
  Insurance — Consumer protection — Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule (SABS) — Interpretation of SABS as remedial legislation — Objective to reduce economic hardship for motor vehicle accident victims — Relief from forfeiture granted to prevent unfair denial of optional benefits due to procedural error
• 2025-07-25 Dennis v. Labourers’ International Union of North America, 2025 ONSC 4058 (CanLII)
  Key Words: unreported — inclusive — writing — discretion — panel
• 2025-07-25 Lee v Kim, 2025 ONSC 4061 (CanLII)
  Key Words: unreported — inclusive — writing — discretion — panel
• 2025-07-25 Adam v. Earle, 2025 ONSC 4063 (CanLII)
  Key Words: self-represented — unreported — writing — motion — leave
• 2025-07-25 South Junction Triangle Grows Neighbourhood Association v. City of Toronto, 2025 ONSC 4070 (CanLII)
  Key Words: Administrative law — Ontario Land Tribunal — Leave to appeal — Motion for leave to appeal decision of Ontario Land Tribunal dismissed — Tribunal decision challenged by neighbourhood association — Should leave to appeal be granted? — Leave to appeal denied as no error of law or jurisdictional issue identified in Tribunal’s decision
  Municipalities — Ontario Land Tribunal — Leave to appeal — Neighbourhood association sought leave to appeal Tribunal decision involving municipal planning — Does the Tribunal’s decision warrant appellate review? — Tribunal decision upheld as no significant legal error or public interest issue identified
  Civil procedure — Costs — Dismissed motion for leave to appeal — Costs awarded to responding party — What is the appropriate cost award in the context of a dismissed motion for leave to appeal? — Costs of $5,000 awarded to the City of Toronto, inclusive, payable within thirty days