Court Of Appeal Summaries (June 15 – June 19, 2026)

• Published date: 26 June 2026
• Subject Matter: Corporate/Commercial Law, Employment and HR, Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration, Contracts and Commercial Law, Contract of Employment, Court Procedure
• Law Firm: Blaney McMurtry LLP
• Author: John Polyzogopoulos

Good afternoon.

Following are our summaries of the civil decisions of the Court of Appeal for Ontario for the week of June 15, 2026.

Continue Reading

Congratulations to our very own David Ullmann and Nadav Amar for getting leave to appeal on a point of law as to whether a secured creditor whose security does not attach to an asset of the bankrupt can submit a credit bid to acquire that asset from the trustee in bankruptcy. The asset in question is a proposed claim against the creditor making the bid.

In Wallbridge v. Poupore, the Court allowed the appeal in part. A former lawyer was paid while employed by his old firm a percentage of settlements or judgments recovered on files the lawyer had worked on. After leaving, the lawyer claimed his old firm owed him compensation for files he had worked on but that had not been resolved until after his departure. The motion judge agreed with him, but the Court disagreed and set aside that aspect of the motion judge's decision.

In Diep v. Mac's Convenience Stores Inc., the Court dismissed an appeal by a parking lot owner and snow maintenance company who argued that damages awarded to the respondent should be reduced by the statutory accident benefits he received from his car insurer. The respondent was injured after slipping on ice in a convenience store parking lot. The Court upheld the motion judge's finding that the respondent's negligence and occupiers' liability claims did not arise “directly or indirectly from the use or operation of an automobile” within the meaning of the Insurance Act, as the dominant cause of the loss was the appellants' failure to maintain the parking lot. The Court also confirmed that OHIP's subrogated claims were not precluded by the Health Insurance Act and that the doctrines of abuse of process and issue estoppel did not apply.

In Mazzeo v Mazzeo, the parties share custody of a minor child whose primary residence is with the father in California. The mother who lives in Ontario, has not returned the child pursuant to the custody agreement. A California judge has ordered the child returned to the father.

In James v HSBC Bank of Canada, the Court dismissed the main appeal from a summary judgment decision that dismissed the appellant's action against the bank. The appellant sued the bank after it froze his accounts following suspicious deposits, criminal charges and a Criminal Code restraint order. The appellant was ultimately acquitted of all charges. The appellant argued that summary judgment was inappropriate because of the respondents' delay in bringing the motion and that the motion judge misapprehended the evidence. The Court rejected these arguments. Although the motion judge should have addressed the bank's delay in brining the motion, ultimately, the case was suitable for summary judgment. There was no imminent trial date that was derailed as a result of the motion. Furthermore, the motion judge's factual findings were supported by the record. However, the Court did granted leave to appeal the costs award and reduced the substantial indemnity costs awarded against the appellant from $225,000 to $175,000.

In Lloyd v. Baker, the Court allowed the appeal and dismissed an MVA claim commenced six years after the accident. The respondent argued the claim was not discoverable until she met with a neuropsychologist several years after the accident. The Court found that the respondent's claim was discoverable much earlier and was therefore out of time.
In Singh v Persaud, the Court dismissed an appeal from a trial judgment ordering the appellant to transfer title to a property to the respondent and declaring the respondent sole beneficial owner pursuant to a Statutory Declaration and Acknowledgement of Trust. The Court also found no error in the award of punitive damages award of $10,000.

In Bridging Finance Inc. v. Sharpe, the Court dismissed an appeal by an offshore trust company that was involved in the fraudulent transfer of funds to an offshore trust account. The Trust company had argued that Ontario did not have jurisdiction to hear this issue or that Ontario was otherwise forum non conveniens. However, the alleged fraud and underlying contract formation occurred in Ontario therefore Ontario had jurisdiction.

In Block Developments Inc. v. Brewers Retail Inc., the Court dismissed an appeal challenging the trial judge's $15.5 million damages award for breach of two agreements of purchase and sale involving development properties. The Court held that the trial judge did not err in accepting a lost development profits approach endorsed by both parties' experts. This approach differed from the approach rejected in Rosseau Group because it used the breach date as the assessment date, applied a discount rate reflecting what a reasonable party would pay for projected cash flows considering risk and the time value of money, and was the same approach taken by Brewers' own experts. The Court also upheld the trial judge's finding that purchases made by Block's affiliates post-breach were independent transactions that did not constitute mitigation, as Brewers failed to establish a causal link between its breach and Block's ability to mitigate.

In Brown v. Meaney, the Court dismissed the appeal of two pediatric neurologists found liable for negligence in their treatment of an infant born with a rare vitamin B6-dependent seizure disorder. The Court upheld the trial judge's finding that the appellants breached the standard of care by prematurely ruling out the disorder without completing the diagnostic process. The appellants had also failed to obtain informed consent by not discussing the diagnostic process and associated risks with the patient's parents. Finally, the Court upheld the trial judge's assessment that the appellants' negligence caused the patient's brain injury and developmental delay by way of the commonsense application of the “but for” test.
Wishing everyone an enjoyable weekend.

Table of Contents

Civil Decisions

Keywords: Contracts, Employment, Remuneration, Commissions, Unjust Enrichment, Quantum Meruit, Dumbrell v. The Regional Group of Companies Inc., 2007 ONCA 59, Charles P. Rowen & Associates Inc. et al v. Ciba-Geigy Canada Inc. (1994), 19 O.R. (3d) 205 (C.A.)

Keywords: Torts, Negligence, Occupier's Liability, Slip and Fall, Damages, Contracts, Insurance, Automobile, Statutory Accident Benefits, Health Care Costs, Civil Procedure, Determination of Question of Law, Issue Estoppel, Abuse of Process, Occupiers Liability Act, R.S.O. 1990 c. O.2., Insurance Act R.S.O. 1990, c. I.8., Health Insurance Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.6, Insurance Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. I.8., Automobile Insurance Rate Stability Act, 1996 (Bill 59), Rules of Civil Procedure, r. 21.01(1)(a), El-Khodr v. Lackie, 2017 ONCA 716, Ontario (Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care) v. Georgiou, 2002 CanLII 45036 (ON CA), Greenhalgh v. ING Halifax Insurance Co., 2004 CanLII 21045 (ON CA), Heredi v. Fensom, 2002 SCC 50, Hernandez v. 1206625 Ontario Inc., 2002 CanLII 45089 (ON CA), Davis v. Aviva General Insurance Co., 2024 ONSC 3054, Air Canada v. British Columbia, [1989] 1 S.C.R. 1161, Toronto (City) v. C.U.P.E., Local 79, 2003 SCC 63, Danyluk v. Ainsworth Technologies Inc., 2001 SCC 44, Budd v. Paterson (2002), 62 O.R. (3d) 715 (C.A.), Amos v. Insurance Corp. of British Columbia, [1995] 3 S.C.R. 405, Smith v. Co-Operators General Insurance Co., 2002 SCC 30, Tomec v. Economical Mutual Insurance Company, 2019 ONCA 882, Coban v. Allstate Insurance Company, 2026 ONSC 1925

Keywords: Family Law, Parenting, Relocation, Child Abduction, Best Interests of the Child, Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, Can. T.S. 1983 No. 35, RJR-MacDonald v. Canada (Attorney General), [1994] 1 S.C.R. 31, D.C. v T.B., 2021 ONCA 562, K.K. v. M.M., 2021 ONCA 407, Office of the Children's Lawyer v. Balev, 2018 SCC 16

Keywords: Contracts, Banking, Civil Procedure, Summary Judgment, Substantial Indemnity Costs, Proportionality, Rules of Civil Procedure, rr. 49.10, 57.01, Avedian v Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. (Enbridge Gas Distribution), 2021 ONCA 361, Doef v Hockey Canada et al., 2022 ONSC 1411, Clarington (Municipality) v Blue Circle Canada Inc., 2009 ONCA 722

Lloyd v. Baker, 2026 ONCA 434

Keywords: Torts, Negligence, MVA, Permanent Serious Impairment, Civil Procedure, Limitation Periods, Discoverability, Limitations Act, 2002, S.O. 2002, c. 24, ss. 4, 5, Sched. B, Insurance Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. I.8, s. 267.5, Sanei v. Debarros, 2024 ONCA 104, Everding v. Skrijel, 2010 ONCA 437, Fennell v. Deol, 2016 ONCA 249, Peixeiro v. Haberman, [1997] 3 S.C.R. 549

Keywords: Civil Procedure, Property Law, Contracts, Interpretation, Trusts, Ownership, Intent, Transfer of Title, Statutory Declaration, Acknowledgement of Trust, ex turpi causa, Housen v Nikolaisen, 2002 SCC 33, Sattva Capital Corp. v Creston Moly Corp., 2014 SCC 53, R v Sheppard, 2002 SCC 26, Seelster Farms et al v Her Majesty the Queen and OLG, 2020 ONSC 4013, Upper Canada v Guardian Insurance Co. of Canada, 2006 SCC 21, Waxman v Waxman (2004), 186 OAC 201 (CA), Scott v Golden Oaks Enterprises Inc., 2024 SCC 32, R v GF, 2021 SCC 20

Keywords: Contracts, Trusts, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Torts, Fraud, Civil Procedure, Jurisdiction, Forum Non conveniens, Notices of Motion, Rules of Civil Procedure, r. 37.01, 2249659 Ontario Ltd. v. Sparkasse Siegen, 2013 ONCA 354, Haaretz.com v. Goldhar, 2018 SCC 28, Club Resorts Ltd. v. Van Breda, 2012 SCC 17, Lapointe Rosenstein Marchand Melancon LLP v. Cassels Brock & Blackwell LLP, 2016 SCC 30, Kyko Global Inc. v. M/S Crawford Bayley & Co., 2021 ONCA 736, Sinclair v. Venezia Turismo, 2025 SCC 7, Sattva Capital Corp. v. Creston Moly Corp., 2014 SCC 53, 2183164 Ontario Inc. v. Gillani, 2013 ONSC 1456, Laxton v. Anstalt, 2011 BCCA 212

Keywords:Contracts, Real Property, Agreements of Purchase and Sale of Land, Damages, Defences, Mitigation, The Rosseau Group Inc. v. 2528061 Ontario Inc....