Ontario Court of Appeal summarily dismisses appeal under new rule 2.1

Gilbertson Davis LLPAppellate Advocacy, Civil Litigation0 Comments

In Brown v. Lloyd’s of London Insurance Market, 2015 ONCA 235, the Court of Appeal for Ontario summarily dismissed an appeal on its own motion, pursuant to rule 2.1.  Rule 2.1 has been in force since July 1, 2014, and is intended to put an end to civil actions that are, on the face of the statement of claim, so obviously without merit that no argument apart from counsel’s letter of request is required.  Gilbertson Davis’ Lee Akazaki was counsel for one of the successful defendants / respondents. This appears to be the first time the rule has been invoked to dismiss a civil appeal.  The practice has proven very economical, as the necessity for expensive, labour-intensive motions to strike statements of claim, has been eliminated in instances where actions are clearly without merit.

Divisional Court dismisses Groia v. LSUC appeal, reveals flawed strategy

Gilbertson Davis LLPAppeals, Appellate Advocacy0 Comments

Today, the Divisional Court of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice dismissed Joseph Groia’s appeal from the Law Society of Upper Canada’s discipline conviction for uncivil conduct during a criminal trial (Groia v. LSUC).  One of the recurrent aspects of Groia’s position, both during tribunal and judicial proceedings, was that the Law Society ought not to have prosecuted the lawyer when the trial judge from the criminal trial against Groia’s client, John Felderhof, meted out no disciplinary measure against Groia.  Belief in this theory of defence appears to have guided the much of the strategy of the defence. At paragraphs 26-45 of the Divisional Court’s decision, Justice Nordheimer explained that the Law Society, as the statutory regulator of all lawyer conduct, has both the authority and expertise to consider allegations of lawyer misconduct.  In contrast, the supervisory role exercised by judges and courts can be tempered by exigencies of the … Read More

30 Day Time Limit to Appeal Arbitration Award

Nick P. Poon, B.Sc. (Hons.), B.A., J.D.Appellate Advocacy, Arbitration, Commercial, Commercial Arbitration0 Comments

The Ontario Court of Appeal decision in R & G Draper Farms (Keswick) Ltd. v. 1758691 Ontario Inc., 2014 ONCA 278, involved a dispute between two Ontario-based farming businesses over the purchase and sale of carrots and carrot chunks.  The parties agreed to resolve the dispute through arbitration in accordance with The Fruit and Vegetable Dispute Resolution Corporation (“DRC”) arbitration rules.  The arbitrator awarded damages to the respondent. The issue arose when the appellant applied to the Superior Court of Justice to set aside the arbitration award approximately two and a half months later.  The Arbitration Act, 1991 (the “Act”) provides for a thirty day time period to appeal the arbitration award while the International Commercial Arbitration Act (the “ICAA”) provides for a longer three month time period.  Unfortunately, the DRC rules are silent in respect to which arbitration act may apply. Under s. 2(1) of the Act, the Act applied unless the application of the Act was excluded by law, or the arbitration was … Read More

Summary Judgment in the Supreme Court of Canada: Hryniak v Mauldin and Its Implications

David Alderson, LL.B, LL.M (Commercial and Corporate), Lawyer, Qualified Arbitrator and MediatorAppeals, Appellate Advocacy, Civil Litigation, Commercial Litigation, Gilbertson Davis LLP News, Summary Judgment0 Comments

On March 26, 2014, David Alderson, lawyer with Gilbertson Davis LLP was the Chair / Moderator of Osgoode Hall Law School’s webinar entitled Summary Judgment in the Supreme Court of Canada: Hryniak v Mauldin and Its Implications. The panelists were the Honourable Justice David M. Brown, Superior Court of Justice (Ontario), Professor Janet Walker, Osgoode Hall Law School and Cynthia B. Kuehl, Lerners LLP. A link to the agenda of the Osgoode PD Webinar Summary Judgment in the Supreme Court of Canada: Hryniak v Mauldin and Its Implications is here. David Alderson was one of the counsel for the successful respondents in the Supreme Court of Canada. The related Gilbertson Davis LLP Practice Area is described here.