Décisions de la Cour

• 2025-06-02 Kininsberg v Meerapfel, 2025 ONSC 3284 (CanLII)
  Key Words: Family — Costs in family law — Presumption of costs in favour of successful party — Factors influencing quantum — Reasonableness, proportionality, and offers to settle considered — Did the court properly apply the principles governing costs in family law? — Subrule 24(1) and 24(12) of the Family Law Rules applied<br />Family — Bad faith conduct — Respondent's litigation strategy — Misleading submissions and attempts to delay proceedings — Did the Respondent's conduct amount to bad faith, justifying full indemnity costs? — Subrule 24(8) of the Family Law Rules applied<br />Civil procedure — Costs — Reasonableness and proportionality — Quantum of costs awarded for jurisdiction motion and leave to appeal motion — Were the costs reasonable given the complexity of issues and conduct of the parties? — Principles from Beaver v. Hill, 2018 ONSC 3352 applied<br />Family — Bilingual hearings — Respondent's insistence on bilingual proceedings — Impact on costs — Whether language selection was used strategically or reasonably — Sections 125 and 126 of the Courts of Justice Act considered
• 2025-05-30 JCL Concrete Pumping Ltd. v. SEMA Railway Structures Inc., 2025 ONSC 3243 (CanLII)
  Key Words: Construction — Costs in construction lien actions — Substantial indemnity costs — Defendant entirely successful at trial — Plaintiffs' claims dismissed — Whether costs award should reflect fairness and reasonableness — Governing discretion under section 86 of the Construction Act — Broad discretion to award costs, including substantial indemnity costs, where the least expensive course was not taken<br />Statutory interpretation — Construction Act — Interaction with Rules of Civil Procedure — Whether subrule 76.12.1(1) limiting recoverable costs applies to lien actions — Section 86 of the Construction Act providing broad discretion inconsistent with subrule 76.12.1(1) — Costs limitations under Rule 76 not binding in lien actions<br />Contracts — Rejection of settlement offers — Failure to amend pleadings — Plaintiffs failed to address contractual issues raised by the defendant — Whether plaintiffs' litigation conduct, including rejection of settlement offers, affects costs award — Defendant's position on lack of contractual relationship upheld at trial<br />Civil procedure — Proportionality in costs awards — Complexity of issues versus quantum of claims — Whether costs incurred by the defendant were disproportionate to the value of the claims — Offers to settle and trial preparation considered in assessing proportionality — Substantial indemnity costs awarded despite plaintiffs' arguments on proportionality
• 2025-05-30 Duffy v. McDaniel, 2025 ONSC 3227 (CanLII)
  Key Words: Civil procedure — Approval motion — Settlement approval — Contingency fee retainer agreement — Solicitor-client accounts — Structured payment schedule — Court approval required for settlements involving parties under disability — Whether the proposed solicitor-client accounts and structured payment schedule are reasonable — Framework for court approval of settlements under disability law<br />Professional responsibility — Solicitor-client accounts — Contingency fee agreements — Reasonableness of fees — Factors considered include time expended, complexity, risks, and results achieved — Whether the proposed fees for Stephen and Adriana are reasonable — Court approved fees based on contingency fee agreement and quantum meruit principles<br />Estates and trusts — Structured settlement — Management of settlement funds — Structured payment schedule for disabled party — Lifetime payments with 20-year guarantee — Consideration of disability benefits and future entitlements — Whether the proposed structure is in the best interests of the disabled party — Court approved structured payment schedule
• 2025-05-29 Vaya c. Metraux, 2025 ONCS 2676 (CanLII)
  Key Words: père — mère — nounou — résidence habituelle — xxx
• 2025-05-29 R v. S.A., 2025 ONSC 3202 (CanLII)
  Key Words: Criminal infractions — Sexual interference — Sexual assault — Allegations of sexual abuse by an uncle against a minor niece — Did the Crown prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed sexual interference and sexual assault? — Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, ss. 151, 271 — Standard of proof in criminal cases — Application of R. v. W. (D.) framework for assessing reasonable doubt<br />Evidence — Credibility of child witnesses — Reliability of testimony — Child complainant’s evidence assessed based on age, demeanor, and understanding of truth versus lies — Prior fabrication of a false allegation — Did the complainant’s evidence remain credible and reliable despite inconsistencies and a fabricated story? — Framework for assessing child witness credibility in sexual abuse cases<br />Criminal procedure — Testimony of the accused — Defendant’s denial of allegations — Assessment of whether the defendant’s testimony raised a reasonable doubt — Consideration of demeanor, internal consistency, and plausibility of the defendant’s evidence — Application of R. v. A.J.S. and R. v. H.C. to evaluate credibility of the accused<br />Evidence — Standard for child witness testimony — Sexual abuse allegations involving a minor — Application of R. v. B. (G.) and R. v. D.F. to assess child witness testimony — Consideration of developmental stage, memory, and evolving understanding of human sexuality — Whether deficiencies in recollection or terminology undermine credibility

Cour divisionnaire - décisions récentes

• 2025-05-30 John v. Swedcan Lumican Plastics Inc., 2025 ONSC 3022 (CanLII)
  Key Words: Administrative law — Judicial review — Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario — Summary hearing — Reasonableness of decision — Tribunal dismissed application for lack of evidence linking alleged unfair treatment to Code grounds — Was the HRTO’s decision unreasonable due to failure to consider relevant evidence? — Standard of review for HRTO decisions under s. 45.8 of the Human Rights Code — Vavilov framework applied to assess reasonableness of administrative decisions<br />Evidence — Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario — Summary hearing — Applicant alleged discrimination and failure to accommodate disability — Tribunal found no evidence linking unfair treatment to Code grounds — Did the HRTO fail to consider relevant evidence, including testimony and medical records? — Tribunal’s duty to address evidence before rejecting it as insufficient — Test for evidence sufficiency in summary hearings<br />Civil procedure — Procedural fairness — Change in procedure — Summary hearing ordered after merits hearing commenced — Tribunal failed to justify change in procedure or address applicant’s objections — Did the HRTO breach procedural fairness by overruling prior procedural decisions? — Baker factors applied to assess procedural fairness — Legitimate expectations of applicant to complete merits hearing<br />Labour and employment — Human Rights Code — Individual respondents — Striking of personal respondents from application — Tribunal found no prejudice in removing individual respondents due to vicarious liability of corporate employer — Was the decision to strike individual respondents reasonable? — Schrenk decision considered but not determinative — Tribunal’s discretion in naming individual respondents<br />Rights and freedoms — Reasonable apprehension of bias — Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario — Applicant alleged bias by Vice-Chair in dismissing application — Strong presumption of impartiality for administrative decision-makers — Was there a reasonable apprehension of bias? — Threshold for displacing presumption of impartiality not met — Tribunal’s duty to provide sufficient reasons to demonstrate impartiality
• 2025-05-30 Mendoza v. Cruz, 2025 ONSC 3044 (CanLII)
  Key Words: writing — reported — payable — motion — leave
• 2025-05-30 Talebzadeh v. Nedaneg Financial Corp., 2025 ONSC 3042 (CanLII)
  Key Words: writing — reported — motion — leave — dismissed
• 2025-05-30 Strub v. Harkness, 2025 ONSC 3050 (CanLII)
  Key Words: motion — leave — writing — discretion — panel
• 2025-05-30 Ventullo v. Demelo, 2025 ONSC 3099 (CanLII)
  Key Words: Lease — Termination of tenancy — Validity of notice of termination — Landlord sought to terminate tenancy for own use under section 48 of the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 — Tenant argued notice was invalid due to improper identification of the rental unit — Did the LTB err in law in finding the notice valid? — Proper application of section 43 of the RTA regarding notice requirements<br />Lease — Eviction — Balancing interests of landlord and tenant — Tenant was 90 years old, had mobility issues, and had lived in the unit for 18 years — Landlord required unit for personal use to support elderly father — Did the LTB err in law in balancing the parties' interests under section 83 of the RTA? — Proper exercise of discretion under section 83(2) and (3) of the RTA<br />Administrative law — Procedural fairness — Tenant alleged procedural unfairness due to lack of access to duty counsel, absence of interpreter, absence of mediation, and curtailment of submissions — Did the LTB breach the tenant's right to a procedurally fair hearing? — Standard of review for procedural fairness is correctness