Court Of Appeal Summaries (April 14-18, 2025)

• Published date: 24 April 2025
• Law Firm: Blaney McMurtry LLP
• Author: Mr John Polyzogopoulos

Good afternoon.

Following are our summaries of the civil decisions of the Court of Appeal for Ontario for the week of April 14, 2025. Family law was the theme of the week.

In A.A. v. Z.S.M., a child abduction/relocation case, the Court allowed the appeal from an order returning a 19-month-old child to Bangladesh under s. 40 of the Children's Law Reform Act, finding that the motion judge failed to properly assess the risk of serious harm. The Court clarified that refugee claims do not automatically bar return orders and emphasized the need for a thorough analysis of serious harm, including the impact of domestic violence and the potential separation of the child from the primary caregiver. The case was remitted for a new hearing due to the failure to properly consider these factors.

In Wade v. Avery, the Court dismissed the husband's appeal from an order vesting title to the matrimonial home with the wife.

In Chapman v. Ing, a joint family venture case, the Court upheld the trial judge's finding of unjust enrichment against the appellant. The respondent had made significant unilateral improvements to a property owned by a jointly owned company.

In S.R.I.S. v. N.Z., the Court dismissed the father's appeal from the motion judge's determinations with respect to parenting time, decision making and support.

In Douglas v Faucher, the Court dismissed the appeal from a child support order.

In the only non-family law case, The North West Company LP v. Classic Furs Company Ltd., an appeal and cross-appeal related to a contract for the sale of coyote furs used on Canada Goose parkas were both partly allowed. The Court found that the trial judge made various errors with respect to her assessment of damages and by not awarding punitive damages to punish the supplier of the furs for its bad behaviour, which included unilaterally increasing the price of the product and failing to deliver that agreed-upon quantity.

Happy Easter to everyone celebrating.

Table of Contents

Civil Decisions

Wade v. Avery, 2025 ONCA 275

Keywords: Family Law, Spousal Support, Child Support, Property, Matrimonial Home, Remedies, Equalization of Net Family Property, Vesting Orders, Civil Procedure, Procedural and Natural Justice, Uncontested Trials, Notice, Family Law Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. F.3, ss. 9(1)(d)(i), 34(1)(c), Partition Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.4, Lamothe v. Ellis, 2022 ONCA 789, Matos v. Driesman, 2024 ONCA 271, Cosentino v. Cosentino, 2017 ONCA 593, Lynch v. Segal (2006), 82 O.R. (3d) 641 (C.A.)

Chapman v. Ing, 2025 ONCA 292

Keywords: Family Law, Property, Joint Family Venture, Unjust Enrichment, Remedies, Equitable Remedies, Constructive Trust, Business Corporations Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. B.16, s. 22(3)(b), Excise Tax Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. E-15, Insurance Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. I.8, Molodowich v. Penttinen (1980), 17 R.F.L. (2d) 376 (Ont. Dist. Ct.), Moore v. Sweet, 2018 SCC 52, Kerr v. Baranow, 2011 SCC 10, Reference re Goods and Services Tax, [1992] 2 SCR 445, Wildman v. Wildman (2006), 82 O.R. (3d) 401 (Ont. C.A.), Wildman in Lynch v. Segal (2006), 82 O.R. (3d) 641 (Ont. C.A.), BCE Inc. v. 1976 Debentureholders, 2008 SCC 69

A.A. v. Z.S.M., 2025 ONCA 283

Keywords: Family Law, Parenting, Relocation, Child Abduction, Immigration Law, Refugees, Civil Procedure, Procedural Fairness, Adjournments, Temporary Stay of Proceedings, Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, 25 October 1980, 1343 U.N.T.S. 89, Children's Law Reform Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.12, ss. 19, 22(1)(b), 23(b), 40, Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27, M.A.A. v. D.E.M.E., 2020 ONCA 486, Zafar v. Azeem, 2024 ONCA 15, R. v. Palmer, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 759, Barendregt v. Grebliunas, 2022 SCC 22, Bors v. Bors, 2021 ONCA 513, A.C.V.P. v. A.M.P., 2022 ONCA 283, Goldman v. Kudelya, 2017 ONCA 300, Peel (Regional Municipality) v. Great Atlantic and Pacific Co. of Canada Ltd. (1990), 74 O.R. (2d) 164 (C.A.), Mikisew Cree First Nation v. Canada (Minister of Canadian Heritage), 2005 SCC 69, Halton Community Credit Union Ltd. v. ICL Computers Ltd. (1985), 1 C.P.C. (2d) 252 (Ont. C.A.), Jones v. Tsige (2011), 106 O.R. (3d) 721 (C.A.), New Brunswick v. G.(J.), [1999] 3 S.C.R. 46, F. v. N., 2022 SCC 51, Geliedan v. Rawdah, 2020 ONCA 254, A.M.R.I. v. K.E.R., 2011 ONCA 417, F. v. N., 2021 ONCA 614, Office of the Children's Lawyer v. Balev, 2018 SCC 16, Németh v. Canada (Justice), 2010 SCC 56, Ojeikere v.Ojeikere, 2018 ONCA 372

Douglas v Faucher, 2025 ONCA 293

Keywords: Family Law, Child Support, Variation, Material Change of Circumstances, Civil Procedure, Standard of Review, Federal Child Support Guidelines, S.O.R./97-175, s. 9, Contino v. Leonelli-Contino, 2005 SCC 63, Michel v. Graydon, 2020 SCC 24

The North West Company LP v. Classic Furs Company Ltd., 2025 ONCA 295

Keywords: Contracts, Sale of Goods, Torts, Conspiracy, Damages, Punitive Damages, Civil Procedure, Standard of Review, The North West Company LP v. Classic Furs Company Ltd., 2023 ONSC 3223, Martin v. Goldfarb (1998), 41 O.R. (3d) 161 (C.A.), leave to appeal refused, [1998] S.C.C.A. No. 516., SS&C Technologies Canada Corp. v. The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation, 2024 ONCA 675, MS Lighting Ltd. v. KJS Transport Inc., 2014 ONCA 1, Housen v. Nikolaisen, 2002 SCC 33, Southcott Estates Inc. v. Toronto Catholic District School Board, 2012 SCC 51, Krmpotic v. Thunder Bay Electronics Ltd., 2024 ONCA 332, Whiten v. Pilot Insurance Co., 2002 SCC 18

S.R.I.S. v. N.Z., 2025 ONCA 304

Keywords: Family Law, Parenting Time, Decision Making, Child Support, Spousal Support, Variation, Material Change of Circumstances, Divorce Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. 3 (2nd Supp.), Van de Perre v. Edwards, 2001 SCC 60, Hickey v. Hickey, [1999] 2 S.C.R. 518

Short Civil Decisions

Diaz v. Bol, 2025 ONCA 277

Keywords: Family Law, Parenting, Support, Variation, Material Change of Circumstances, Family Law Act, RSO 1990, c F.3, Duwyn v. Ross, 2024 ONCA 637, Cuthbert v. Nolis, 2024 ONCA 21

Bortoleti De Oliveira v. Ritchie, 2025 ONCA 299

Keywords: Family Law, Child Support, Separation Agreements, Setting Aside, Civil Procedure, Leave to Appeal, Fielding v. Fielding, 2015 ONCA 901

Rout v. Firm Capital Mortgage Fund Inc., 2025 ONCA 287

Keywords: Contracts, Real Property, Mortgages, Enforcement, Penalty, Notice of Sale, Mortgages Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. M.40., Interest Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. I-15

Swan v. Duggan, 2025 ONCA 302

Keywords: Torts, Defamation, Conspiracy, Real Property, Condominiums, Civil Procedure, Striking Pleadings, Frivolous, Vexatious and Abuse of Process, Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 2.1

CIVIL DECISIONS

Wade v. Avery, 2025 ONCA 275

[Gillese, Gomery and Pomerance JJ.A.]

Counsel:

A. B. R. Drury, for the appellant
J. J. W. G. Szaefer, for the respondent

Keywords: Family Law, Spousal Support, Child Support, Property, Matrimonial Home, Remedies, Equalization of Net Family Property, Vesting Orders, Civil Procedure, Procedural and Natural Justice, Uncontested Trials, Notice, Family Law Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. F.3, ss. 9(1)(d)(i), 34(1)(c), Partition Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.4, Lamothe v. Ellis, 2022 ONCA 789, Matos v. Driesman, 2024 ONCA 271, Cosentino v. Cosentino, 2017 ONCA 593, Lynch v. Segal (2006), 82 O.R. (3d) 641 (C.A.)

facts:

Following the parties' separation in 2019 after 16 years of marriage, the respondent applied for a divorce. In her application, she sought child support for the parties' three children, exclusive possession of the matrimonial home, equalization of net family property, and other relief. The applicant did not file an answer or provide financial disclosure. He did not make meaningful child support payments or otherwise assist with the children's expenses, even after being ordered to do so in October 2023. He did not contribute to any payment on the parties' joint obligations, including the mortgage on the matrimonial home, car loan, and other debts. When the respondent brought a summary judgment motion in April 2023, the appellant did not respond, nor did he participate in the uncontested trial that followed a year later.

The appellant appeals the trial judge's order requiring him to pay past and ongoing child support as well as s. 7 expenses and granting the respondent a vesting order conferring to her sole title to the matrimonial home.

issues: 

1. Did the trial judge err in granting a vesting order?
2. Did the trial judge err in ordering retroactive and ongoing child support?

holding: 

Appeal dismissed.

reasoning: 

1. No.

The Court found that the trial judge did not error in granting the vesting order. The appellant argued that the trial judge should not have granted the vesting order given that the appellant did not seek the order in her original application. When drafting her original application in 2020, the Court found that the respondent was not required to anticipate that the appellant would fail to respond or to contribute meaningfully to the children's support or the parties' joint debts and obligations over the years that followed. The question became whether the appellant had adequate notice that the respondent was seeking a vesting order at the uncontested trial in 2024. The court found that the appellant did have adequate notice. The respondent first asked for a vesting order in her motion for summary judgment in 2023. The motion judge who adjudicated that matter was concerned that the appellant might not have understood that a vesting order was a possible outcome and accordingly, sent the matter to an uncontested trial. She also ordered the respondent to serve a copy of the motion judge's endorsement on the appellant prior to the trial, which the respondent did. The Court found that this effectively put the appellant on notice.

The appellant also argued that the trial judge erred in...