In Palichuk v. Palichuk, a series of applications were brought following a family breakdown that resulted in changes to an elderly mother’s will, powers of attorney, and title to interest in her property. The Court held that the mother had the legal capacity to manage her affairs, which was consistent with the uncontroverted expert opinion. Furthermore, because the mother was still alive, the Court held that it was not appropriate for it to determine the validity of any of the executed documents or whether undue influence being exerted over her. This was because any of the documentsm, such as her Will, could still be changed at any time. The Court affirmed the principle that, wWhere a question is hypothetical or contingent on future events, public policy dictates that no decision can should be rendered until the hypothetical set of facts comes to fruition.
In Rebuck v. Ford, the Court upheld the motion judge's decision to grant summary judgment dismissing a class action against Ford for alleged misleading advertising in respect the mileage achieved by its cars. Ford was found to have followed the federal government's guidelines in publishing its EnerGuide labels on its vehicles, even though there were higher standards used to determine fuel consumption prescribed by other countries, such as the U.S.
Other topics this week included the dismissal of a motion for an interlocutory injunction by a First Nations group regarding the in order to stop the cutting down of old trees at Osgoode Hall, an appeal that overturned challenging a motion judge’s order precluding a limitations defence on a Rule 21 motion and jurisdiction, and a family law matter upholding the motion judge’s determination that the appellant was a vexatious litigant.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Haudenosaunee Development Institute v. Metrolinx, 2023 ONCA 122
Keywords: Aboriginal Law, Real Property, Expropriation, Infrastructure, Municipal Law, Heritage Properties, Osgoode Hall, Civil Procedure, Interim and Interlocutory Injunctions, Appeals, Leave to Appeal, Courts of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.43, s. 6(1)(a), Haudenosaunee Development Institute v. Metrolinx, 2023 ONSC 1170, RJR-MacDonald Inc. v. Canada (Attorney General),  1 S.C.R. 311, Halton (Regional Municipality) v. F. Greco & Sons Limited (Greco Construction), 2021 ONCA 446, Hillmond Investments Ltd. v. Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (1996), 29 O.R. (3d) 612 (C.A.), Denison Mines Limited v. Ontario Hydro (2001), 56 O.R. (3d) 181 (C.A.), Mikisew Cree First Nation v. Canada (Minister of Canadian Heritage), 2005 SCC 69
Canada (Attorney General) v. M.C., 2023 ONCA 124
Keywords: Property, Firearms, Regulation, Civil Procedure, Appeals, Interveners, Firearms Act, S.C. 1995, c. 39, Rules of Civil Procedure, r. 13.01, R. v. M.C. et. al., 2022 ONSC 6299, Butty v. Butty (2009), 98 O.R. (3d) 713 (C.A.), McIntyre Estate v. Ontario (Attorney General), 2001 CanLII 7972 (Ont. C.A.), Buccilli v. Pillitteri, 2014 ONCA 337, Peel (Regional Municipality) v. Great Atlantic and Pacific Co. of Canada Ltd. (1990), 74 O.R. (2d) 164 (C.A.), Jones v. Tsige (2011), 106 O.R. (3d) 721 (C.A.), Tomec v. Economical Mutual Insurance Company, 2019 ONCA 839
Palichuk v. Palichuk, 2023 ONCA 116
Keywords: Wills and Estates, Powers of Attorney, Capacity, Undue Influence, Substitute Decisions Act, 1992, S.O. 1992, c. 30, ss. 2, 6, 22, 32, 38, 45, 49, 55, 66, 67, Health Care Consent Act, 1996, S.O. 1996, c. 2, Sched. A, Courts of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C. 43, ss. 97, 133, Succession Law Reform Act, R.S.O., 1990, c. S. 26, s. 22, Rules of Civil Procedure, r. 14.05(3)(a), Leonard v. Zychowicz, 2022 ONCA 212, Re Skinner,  3 O.R. 35 (H.C.J.), Furfaro v. Furfaro (1986), 22 E.T.R. 241, 1472292 Ontario Inc. (Rosen Express) v. Northbridge General Insurance Company, 2019 ONCA 753, Curtis v. Sheffield (1882), 21 Ch. D. 1, Duke of Marlborough v. Lord Godlophin (1750), Ves. Sen. 61, Y.P. v. M.L.S., 2006 MBCA 32, S.A. (Trustee of) v. M.S., 2005 ABQB 549, Brandon v. Brandon,  O.J. No. 2986, aff’d  O.J. No. 4593, Rubner v. Bistricer, 2018 ONSC 1934, Dempster v. Dempster, 2008 CanLII 2747 (Ont. S.C), Stern v. Stern, (2003) 49 E.T.R. (2d) 129 (Ont. S.C), Foley v. McIntyre, 2015 ONCA 382, Pecore v. Pecore, 2007 SCC 17, Vanier v. Vanier, 2017 ONCA 561, Geffen v. Goodman Estate,  2 S.C.R. 353, O’Meara v. Miller, 2021 ONSC 5919, McFlow Capital Corp. v. James, 2021 ONCA 753, Gary Anthony Bennett Professional Corporation v. Triella Corp., 2019 ONCA 225, BradJay Investments Limited v. Village Developments Limited (2006), 218 O.A.C. 315 (C.A.), Hamilton v. Open Window Bakery Ltd., 2004 SCC 9, Brian A. Schnurr, Estate Litigation, loose-leaf, 2nd ed., vol. 2, (Toronto: Thomson Reuters Canada Limited, 2021)
Toussaint v. Canada (Attorney General), 2023 ONCA 117
Keywords: Health Law, Universal Health Care, Constitutional Law, Right to Life, Security of the Person, Charter Claims, International Law, Human Rights, Customary International Law, Discrimination, Administrative Law, Civil Procedure, Striking Pleadings, No Reasonable Cause of Action, Defences, Limitation Periods, Jurisdiction, Limitations Act, 2002, S.O. 2002, c. 24, s.5, Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 19 December 1966, 999 U.N.T.S. 171, Can T.S. 1976 No. 47. 6 I.L.M. 368, Rules of Civil Procedure, r. 21.01, Beaudoin Estate v. Campbellford Memorial Hospital, 2021 ONCA 57, Kaynes v. BP p.l.c., 2021 ONCA 36, Clark v. Ontario (Attorney General), 2019 ONCA 311, Brozmanova v. Tarshis, 2018 ONCA 523, Salewski v. Lalonde, 2017 ONCA 515, Ridel v. Goldberg, 2017 ONCA 739, Skof v. Bordeleau, 2020 ONCA 729, Hopkins v. Kay, 2014 ONCA 514
Wang v. Li, 2023 ONCA 119
Keywords: Family Law, Civil Procedure, Vexatious Litigants, Appeals, Jurisdiction, Final or Interlocutory, Courts of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.43. s. 19(1)(b), Rules of Civil Procedure, r. 2.1, Bell v. Fishka, 2022 ONCA 683, Van Delst v. Hronowsky, 2022 ONCA 881, Chirico v. Szalas, 2016 ONCA 586, Overtveld v. Overtveld, 2022 ONCA 269
Rebuck v. Ford Motor Company, 2023 ONCA 121
Keywords: Contracts, Consumer Protection, Competition Law, False or Misleading Advertising, Civil Procedure, Class Proceedings, Summary Judgment, Competition Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-34, s. 1.1, Consumer Protection Act, 2002, S.O. 2002, c. 30, Sch. A., s. 14, s. 17, s. 52(1), s. 52(1.1)(a), s. 52(4), Guidelines for Determination and Submission of Fuel Consumption Data for Fuel Consumption Labelling, Consumer Protection Act, C.Q.L.R. c. P-40.1, Richard v. Time Inc., 2012 SCC 8
Short Civil Decisions
Keywords: Family Law, Divorce, Spousal Support, Civil Procedure, Expert Evidence, Costs, Evidence Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. E.23, Rules of Civil Procedure, Tariff A, item 26, Assayag-Shneer v. Shneer, 2023 ONCA 14
Please log in to read the full article.