Court Of Appeal Summaries (August 25 ' August 29)

• Published date: 02 September 2025
• Law Firm: Blaney McMurtry LLP
• Author: John Polyzogopoulos

Following are our summaries of the civil decisions of the Court of Appeal for Ontario for the week of August 25, 2025.

Continue Reading

R.L. v. M.F. involved a dispute over spousal support following the end of an over 14-year marriage in which both the husband and wife were high income earners. The husband was the primary breadwinner while the wife took on most household and parenting responsibilities along with her part-time professional career. The trial judge awarded the wife ongoing spousal support, recognizing her entitlement based on both her contributions to the marriage and the economic partnership it created. The husband challenged the spousal support order on multiple grounds. The Court dismissed all grounds of appeal, finding no errors in the trial judge's reasoning, and reaffirmed the principle of equitable sharing of marital benefits and the discretionary nature of spousal support awards.

Kirby v. Woods involved a dispute between divorced parents over the return of their daughter, X, to their country of origin under the Hague Convention after the mother brought X and her sibling to Canada and successfully claimed refugee status. The father sought X's return, while the mother argued that X, now recognized as a refugee, would face serious harm if returned. The application judge ordered X's return, finding the exceptions to return under the Hague Convention did not apply and questioning the child's independent objection. On appeal, the Court found that the judge erred by failing to apply the rebuttable presumption against returning a recognized refugee child and by not giving proper weight to X's own objections and fears of violence. The appeal was allowed and the order for X's return set aside.

In Pine Glen Thorold Inc. v. Rolling Meadows Land Development Corporation, the Court held that a lawsuit stemming from a land sale dispute was an abuse of process because it attempted to re-litigate issues already decided or that could have been raised in prior proceedings.

In Barry v. Anantharajah, a pedestrian struck by a vehicle sued for negligence and was awarded only $16,160.50 after a three-week jury trial. The trial judge awarded the plaintiff $300,000 in costs (over $100,000 less than the plaintiff had claimed), finding that she was more successful at trial than the defendant, especially since the defendant and her insurer (Aviva) had refused to make any monetary settlement offer and had pursued an aggressive litigation strategy. On appeal, the Court upheld the costs award, emphasizing the trial judge's discretion, the reasonableness of the plaintiff's legal costs given the case's complexity, and the importance of balancing proportionality with other costs considerations. The Court concluded that though the costs far exceeded the damages awarded, this was not uncommon and was justified in this case. The message to insurers that I take away is that there is a price to pay for being too aggressive (and clogging up the courts in the process).

Wishing everyone an enjoyable weekend.

Table of Contents

Civil Decisions

R.L. v. M.F. 2025 ONCA

Keywords: Family Law, Spousal Support, Entitlement, Compensatory, Non-Compensatory, Post-separation Income, Property, Equalization of Net Family Property, Divorce, Pre-judgment Interest, Divorce Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. 3, s.15.2(6), s.15.2(4) and (6), s.15.2(5)(a), Courts of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.43, s.128(1)(2)-(4), s.130(2), Hickey v. Hickey, [1999] 2 S.C.R. 518, Hendriks v. Hendriks, 2022 ONCA 165, Scheibler v. Scheibler, 2024 ONCA 191, Berta v. Berta, 2017 ONCA 874, Ballanger v. Ballanger, 2020 ONCA 626, Johanson v. Hinde, 2016 ONCA 430, Debora v. Debora (2006), 83 O.R. (3d) 81 (C.A.), Gonabady-Namadon v. Mohammadzadeh, 2009 BCCA 448, Moge v. Moge, [1992] 3 S.C.R. 813, Miglin v. Miglin, 2003 SCC 24, Bracklow v. Bracklow, [1999] 1 S.C.R. 420, Plese v. Herjavec, 2020 ONCA 810, Cassidy v. McNeil, 2010 ONCA 218, Droit de la famille - 1221, 2012 QCCA 19, Zacharias v. Zacharias, 2015 BCCA 376, Allaire v. Allaire, (2003), 170 O.A.C. 72 (C.A.), Chutter v. Chutter, 2008 BCCA 507, Sea v. He, 2024 BCCA 161, Linton v. Linton (1990), 1 O.R. (3d) 1 (C.A.), Halliwell v. Halliwell, 2017 ONCA 349, Kerr v. Baranow, 2011 SCC 10, Aquila v. Aquila, 2016 MBCA 333, Farrar v. Farrar (2003), 63 O.R. (3d) 141 (C.A.), Gilliland v. Gilliland, 72 R.F.L. (6th) 88 (Ont. S.C.), McKenzie v. McKenzie, 2014 BCCA 381, Macdonald v. Macdonald, 2017 NSCA 34, Hodgkinson v. Hodgkinson, 2006 BCCA 158, Berger v. Berger, 2016 ONCA 884, Andrews v. Andrews (1999), 45 O.R. (32d) 577, Adams v. Adams (2001), 15 R.F.L. (5th), Dancy v. Mason, 2019 ONCA 410, Hathaway v. Hathaway, 2014 BCCA 310, [2014] S.C.C.A. No. 412, Patton-Casse v. Casse, 2012 ONCA 709, Rémillard v. Rémillard, 2014 MBCA 101, Kinsella v. Mills, 2020 ONSC 4785, Horner v. Horner (2004), 72 O.R. (3d) 561 (C.A.), Linn v. Frank, 2014 SKCA 87, Kohan v. Kohan, 2016 ABCA 125, Helle v. Helle, 2019 BCCA 97, Marinangeli v. Marinangeli (2003), 66 O.R. (3d) 40 (C.A.), Hartshorne v. Hartshorne, 2009 BCSC 698, Hersey v. Hersey, 2016 ONCA 494, Thompson v. Thompson, 2013 ONSC 5500, Kirvan v. Kirvan, 2016 ONSC 7712, Hamilton v. St. Denis, 2019 ONSC 2766, Fisher v. Fisher, 2008 ONCA 11, Burgess v. Burgess (1995), O.R. (3d) 547 (C.A.), Starkman v. Starkman (1990), 75 O.R. (2d) 19, M.R. v. G.M., 2016 NBCA 33, Anderson v. McWatt, 2016 ONCA 553, Carol Rogerson & Rollie Thompson, Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines, Ottawa: Department of Justice, 2008, Rollie Thompson, "SSAG FAQS 2022, Your Frequently (Or Occasionally) Asked Questions about the SSAG and Some 'Answers'": March 2022, Rollie Thompson, "It's Complicated: How Entitlement Wends Its Way In and Out of the SSAG", Paper delivered at the 15th Biennial Family Law Conference 2025, July 3, 2015, Carol Rogerson & Rollie Thompson, Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines: The Revised User's Guide, Ottawa: Department of Justice Canada, 2016

Kirby v. Woods, 2025 ONCA 601

Keywords: Family Law, International Law, Hague Convention, Refugee Status, Domestic Violence, Child Abduction, Parenting Order, Rebuttable Presumption, Non-refoulement, Best Interests of the Child, Procedural Fairness, Interim Orders, Judicial Review, Interveners, Designated Representative, Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, Can. T.S. 1983 No. 35, arts. 3, 12, 13(b), 13(2), 20, Hague Convention, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, Can. T.S. 1992 No. 3, art. 12(1), Children's Law Reform Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.12., s. 23, 40, 46, 64-64.2, ss. 22, 41, Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27, s. 96-98, 110, 115(1), 107, 166(c), 167(2), 169(b), 170,170(i) ss. 170(g)-(h), Extradition Act, S.C. 1999, c. 18, s. 44(1), Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s. 7, Refugee Protection Division Rules, SOR/2012-256, r. 1, 20(10), 23, 26(2), 37.2(2), 44(1), 55, rr. 1, 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, Can. T.S. 1969 No. 6, UNHCR, Asylum Processes (Fair and Efficient Asylum Procedures), Global Consultations on International Protection, EC/GC/01/12 (31 May 2001), Child Guideline, the Gender Guideline, and Chairperson Guideline 8: Accessibility to IRB Proceedings - Procedural Accommodations and Substantive Considerations, Policy on the Treatment of Unsolicited Information in the Refugee Protection Division, No. 2015-02, IRB, Designated Representative Guide, s. 2.2, A.M.R.I. v. K.E.R., 2011 ONCA 417, Németh v. Canada (Justice), 2010 SCC 56, M.A.A. v. D.E.M.E., 2020 ONCA 486, [2020] S.C.C.A. No. 402, F. v. N., 2022 SCC 51, Thomson v. Thomson, [1994] 3 S.C.R. 551, Barendregt v. Grebliunas, 2022 SCC 22, Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Vavilov, 2019 SCC 65, Palmer v. The Queen, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 759, Cannock v. Fleguel, 2008 ONCA 758, Osaloni v. Osaloni, 2023 ABCA 116, Ellis v. Wentzell-Ellis, 2010 ONCA 347, Landman v. Daviau, 2012 ONSC 547, Husid v. Daviau, 2012 ONCA 655, [2012] S.C.C.A. No. 485, Pollastro v. Pollastro, (1999), 43 O.R. (3d) 485 (C.A.), Suresh v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2002 SCC 1, Mason v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2023 SCC 21, Singh v. Minister of Employment and Immigration, [1985] 1 S.C.R. 177, Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) v. Chhina, 2019 SCC 29, Pushpanathan v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [1998] 1 S.C.R. 982, Kozak v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2006 FCA 124, Singh v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2022 FC 339, Thamotharem v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2007 FCA 198, Olah v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2019 FC 401, Mabrouki v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2003 FC 1104, Vartia v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2023 FC 1426, Bukvic v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2017 FC 638, X (Re), 2017 CanLII 145536 (I.R.B.), X (Re), 2019 CanLII 120799 (I.R.B.), The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration v. Flores Carrillo, 2008 FCA 94, Canada (Attorney General) v. Ward, [1993] 2 S.C.R. 689, Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) v. Munderere, 2008 FCA 84, [2008] S.C.C.A. No. 187, Quintana Murillo v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2008 FC 966, Qazi v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2005 FC 1204, Zrig v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2003 FCA 178, Senadheerage v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 968, Posluszny v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2004 FC 1085, Reyes Pino v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2012 FC 200, Odetoyinbo v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2009 FC 501, Burai v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 966, A.A. v Z.S.M., 2025 ONCA 283, In Office of the Children's Lawyer v. Balev, 2018 SCC 16, re M. (Abduction: Rights of Custody), [2007] U.K.H.L. 55, Ludwig v. Ludwig, 2019 ONCA 680

Pine Glen Thorold Inc. v. Rolling Meadows Land Development Corporation, 2025 ONCA 604

Keywords: Contracts...