Court Of Appeal Summaries (September 11 ' September 15)

• Published date: 18 September 2023
• Subject Matter: Finance and Banking, Insurance, Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration, Real Estate and Construction, Family and Matrimonial, Financial Services, Family Law, Insurance Laws and Products, Arbitration & Dispute Resolution, Trials & Appeals & Compensation, Construction & Planning, Civil Law
• Law Firm: Blaney McMurtry LLP
• Author: Mr John Polyzogopoulos and Ines Ferreira

Good afternoon
Following are this week's summaries of the civil decisions of the Court of Appeal for Ontario for the week of September 11, 2023.

In Musa v Carleton Condominiumn Corporation, an occupiers' liability slip and fall case, the Court dismissed the snow removal company's appeal from an order finding it liable in negligence. The evidence at trial included expert evidence and industry best practices for snow-plowing and salting.

In Pridmore v. Drenth, the plaintiff was injured while riding as a passenger on an ATV. The driver of the ATV was convicted of two HTA offences for having driven the ATV on a highway after consuming alcohol. The insurer denied third-party liability coverage to the driver's father, the owner of the ATV because he had given his son permission to drive on a road he mistakenly considered not to be a "highway", in breach of a statutory condition of the policy. . The motion judge had determined that the father was entitled to coverage or if not, was entitled to relief from forfeiture. The accident occurred on a different highway from the one the son had been granted permission to drive on, and therefore the inadvertent breach of the statutory condition did not "taint" the whole trip so as to justify a denial of coverage. The Court agreed and dismissed the appeal.

Wishing everyone an enjoyable weekend.

John Polyzogopoulos
Blaney McMurtry LLP
416.593.2953 Email

Ines Ferreira
Blaney McMurtry LLP
416.593.2953 Email

Table of Contents

Civil Decisions

Mohammad v. McMaster University , 2023 ONCA 598

Keywords: Civil Procedure, Appeals, Dismissal for Delay, Dismissal as Frivolous, Vexatious and Abuse of Process, Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 2.1, Administration of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. A.6, s 4.10, Scaduto v. The Law Society of Upper Canada, 2015 ONCA 733, Lochner v. Ontario Civilian Police Commission, 2020 ONCA 720

Pridmore v Drenth , 2023 ONCA 606

Keywords: Contracts, Insurance, Automobiles, Coverage, Third-Party Liability, Breach of Statutory Conditions, Remedies, Relief from Forfeiture, Courts of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990, s.98, Insurance Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. I.8. c. C.43 s.129, Miller v. Carluccio, 2008 ONCA 370, 91 O.R. (3d) 638, Becamon v. Wawanesa Mutual Insurance Company, 2007 CarswellOnt 9747 (S.C.), aff'd 2009 ONCA 113, Kozel v. The Personal Insurance Company, 2014 ONCA 130, Saskatchewan River Bungalows Ltd. v. Maritime Life Assurance Co., [1994] 2 S.C.R. 490, Kerr v. Danier Leather Inc. (2005), 77 O.R. (3d) 321 (C.A.), H.L. v. Canada (Attorney General), 2005 SCC 25

Musa v Carleton Condominium Corporation No. 255 , 2023 ONCA 605

Keywords: Torts, Negligence, Occupiers' Liability, Slip and Fall, Standard of Care, Occupiers' Liability Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. O.2, Waldick v Malcolm, [1991] 2 SCR 456, Housen v Nikolaisen, 2002 SCC 33, Walters v Ontario, 2017 ONCA 53, Fordham v Dutton-Dunwich(Municipality), 2014 ONCA 891, Donoghue v Stevenson, [1932] AC 562 (HL), Mabe Canada Inc v United Floor Ltd, 2017 ONCA 879

Short Civil Decisions

W.A.C. v C.V.F, 2023 ONCA 595

Keywords: Family Law, Child Protection

Ghasempoor v. ICapital Financial Services Corp., 2023 ONCA 607

Keywords: Fresh Evidence, First Elgin Mills Developments Inc v Romandale Farms Limited, 2015 ONCA 54

1947755 Ontario Ltd. v Lamframboise,, 2023 ONCA 604

Keywords: Civil Procedure, Orders, Interlocutory Orders, Enforcement, Contempt, Jurisdiction, The Catalyst Capital Group Inc. v Moyse, 2015 ONCA 784, Simmonds v Simmonds, 2013 ONCA 479

CIVIL DECISIONS

Mohammad v. McMaster University, 2023 ONCA 598

[van Rensburg, Nordheimer and George JJ.A.]]

Counsel:

A. M., acting in person

J.R. Bernardo and A. Anandarajah, for the respondent/responding party, McMaster University

D.M. Paul, for the respondent/responding party, CUPE, Local 3906

K. Martini, for the respondents/responding parties, G. C. and M. U.

A. Hassan and A. Matic, for the respondent, Google LLC

Keywords: Civil Procedure, Appeals, Dismissal for Delay, Dismissal as Frivolous, Vexatious and Abuse of Process, Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 2.1, Administration of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. A.6, s 4.10, Scaduto v. The Law Society of Upper Canada, 2015 ONCA 733, Lochner v. Ontario Civilian Police Commission, 2020 ONCA 720

facts:

The appellant, AM had three appeals before the Court from orders dismissing actions brought by him as vexatious pursuant to r. 2.1.01 of the Rules of Civil Procedure. Two of the appeals had been dismissed for delay by the registrar: (1) the appeal of the claim against McMaster University and CUPE, Local 3906 ("the McMaster appeal") and (2) the appeal of the claim against Dr. GC, Dr. MU and SM ("the GC appeal"). In both appeals, the motion judge declined to set aside the registrar's dismissal for delay. The appellant had filed a panel motion in each matter to review both motion judges' decisions. The third appeal related to a claim brought against Google LLC ("the Google appeal"). The appellant had not perfected the appeal by the extended deadline granted by the Court. The appeal was not dismissed by the registrar for the delay while the appellant attempted to file deficient materials and then additional motions for a further extension of time.

With regards to the McMaster Appeal, the motion judge declined to set aside the registrar's dismissal of the appeal for delay. The motion judge observed that the appellant pointed to no error in the r. 2.1 judge's application of the relevant principles, analysis or conclusion and that the appellant had "doggedly and unsuccessfully...