Recent Newmarket Decisions Found on CanLII - May & June 2025
Descriptions are CanLII AI-generated. Comments on our library newsletter content are always welcome.
Civil
Bennett et al v. Chadwick et al., 2025 ONSC 3603 - RSJ Edwards
The Court dismissed an application seeking to relocate a right-of-way, finding the original access point valid and unobstructed. The Applicants' claims of oppression and restricted access were unsupported by evidence, and their improper use of the Respondents' property contributed to the dispute. Costs submissions were invited.
James v. HSBC Bank of Canada, 2025 ONSC 3597 - Justice McCarthy
The Court awarded $225,000 in costs on a substantial indemnity basis due to the Plaintiff's unfounded claims, refusal to accept a reasonable settlement offer, and protracted litigation spanning over a decade. The Plaintiff's conduct, including contradictory evidence and inflated damages claims, justified the elevated costs award.
D.H. Anderson Investments Inc. v. Castanares, 2025 ONSC 3573 - Justice McCarthy
The Court struck the Defendant's statement of defence and counterclaim for being overly lengthy, scandalous, and irrelevant, with leave to amend. The Defendant must submit a draft amended pleading for review, ensuring compliance with procedural rules and jurisdictional limits, particularly regarding Family Court matters.
D.H. Anderson Investments Inc. v. Castanares, 2025 ONSC 3368 - Justice McCarthy
The Court granted an injunction removing a former romantic partner from a property, finding no evidence of a gift or constructive trust. The Plaintiff satisfied the test for injunctive relief, demonstrating a strong prima facie case, irreparable harm, and a balance of convenience in their favour.
Delfin et al. v. CAA Insurance et al., 2025 ONSC 2901 - Justice Sutherland
The Court struck portions of a claim alleging police negligence in investigating a motor vehicle accident, finding no general duty of care owed to victims. However, it allowed amendments to plead statutory breaches under the Police Services Act and Highway Traffic Act, recognizing potential for a novel claim.
O’Neill v. O’Neill, 2025 ONSC 2892 - Justice Casullo
The Court removed estate trustees due to conflicts of interest, prolonged delays, and failure to fulfill fiduciary duties, appointing neutral successors to ensure proper estate administration.
Criminal
R. v. Faryadpoor, 2025 ONSC 3452 - Justice Fuerst
The Court sentenced the Accused to three years and ten months for a violent home invasion robbery, balancing denunciation, deterrence, and rehabilitation, while considering her remorse, young child, and challenging pre-sentence custody conditions.
R. v. Foran, 2025 ONCJ 332 - Justice Kenkel
The Court upheld the lawfulness of a second roadside breath test conducted without a new demand, finding no breaches of sections 8 or 10(b) of the Charter. The test was deemed investigatory, not eliciting incriminating evidence, and the accused's right to counsel was properly implemented. The charge was proven.
Ontario (Ministry of Labour, Training and Skills Development) v. New Leaf, 2025 ONCJ 333 - Justice Robinson
The Court sentenced a non-profit organization and a supervisor for failing to ensure worker safety, leading to a drowning death. The organization was fined $225,000, and the supervisor was fined $30,000, emphasizing deterrence and accountability under the Occupational Health and Safety Act.
R. v. Mahbub, 2025 ONCJ 317 - Justice Ghosh
The Court sentenced a first-time offender to 5 years and 3 months for child luring, sexual offences against minors, and threatening death, emphasizing deterrence, denunciation, and totality while considering mitigating factors like youth, guilty plea, and harsh pre-sentence custody. Ancillary orders, including SOIRA and s.161 restrictions, were imposed.
R. v. Marong, 2025 ONSC 3437 - Justice Charney
The Court excluded firearm and drug evidence, finding the traffic stop and vehicle search violated Charter rights against arbitrary detention and unreasonable search. The officer's unreliable testimony and serious Charter breaches outweighed society's interest in admitting the evidence.
York (Regional Municipality) v. Kuang, 2025 ONCJ 312 - Justice Harper
An appeal of a stop sign violation conviction was dismissed. The Court upheld the trial findings, citing credible officer testimony and conclusive video evidence proving the offence beyond a reasonable doubt. Discrepancies in the officer's notes and selective enforcement claims did not create reasonable doubt.
York (Regional Municipality) v. Romualdi, 2025 ONCJ 311 - Justice Harper
The Court upheld a conviction for holding a cell phone while driving, ruling the Crown need not prove the device’s wireless capabilities under the Highway Traffic Act. The officer’s observations were deemed credible, and the Justice of the Peace did not reverse the burden of proof. Appeal dismissed.
R. v. Smith-Stebbins, 2025 ONCJ 298 - Justice Kenkel
The Court ruled that a Highway Traffic Act stop in a private hotel parking lot was lawful, as s. 12(1)(d) applies beyond highways. The parking lot was deemed a "public place" under s. 320.24(8) of the Criminal Code. A minor right to counsel breach did not warrant evidence exclusion.
R. v. Galati, 2025 ONCJ 293 - Justice Kenkel
The Court found the Accused guilty of dangerous operation for driving at extreme speeds in hazardous conditions, cutting off vehicles, and ignoring police signals. The Court held that the Accused's conduct was a marked departure from the standard of care expected of a reasonable driver, proving the offence beyond a reasonable doubt.
R. v. Dillon and Shifara, 2025 ONSC 3166 - Justice Harper
The Court excluded evidence obtained during a vehicle stop, finding breaches of sections 8, 9, 10(a), and 10(b) of the Charter. Police improperly detained and questioned the occupants to gain grounds for a search under the Cannabis Control Act, and the search was conducted in an unreasonable manner.
R. v. Chand, 2025 ONCJ 282 - Justice Kenkel
In an aggravated assault trial, the Court found significant errors in defence submissions, including fictitious and incorrect case citations. The Court ordered counsel to redraft submissions with strict guidelines, including a prohibition on using generative AI for legal research, to ensure fairness and accuracy in the trial process.
R. v. Gobin, 2025 ONCJ 266 - Justice Townsend
The Court sentenced the Accused to 12 months in jail and 2 years of probation for hate-motivated assaults against Jewish individuals, emphasizing denunciation, deterrence, and the aggravating factor of hate motivation under the Criminal Code. The sentence reflects the serious impact on victims and the broader community.
R. v. Belk, 2025 ONCJ 259 - Justice Ghosh
The Court found the accused not criminally responsible for stabbing her husband due to a Major Neurocognitive Disorder impairing her ability to understand her actions were morally wrong. The matter was referred to the Ontario Review Board for disposition.
R. v. Cheng, 2025 ONCJ 252 - Justice Kenkel
The Court admitted surveillance video as evidence in a bail breach case, finding it authentic and credible despite challenges from the accused. The Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused violated a bail condition prohibiting proximity to his daughter’s residence.
Family
C.Z. v. J.Y., 2025 ONSC 3729 - Justice Himel
The Court upheld child support for an adult child with severe mental health challenges, rejecting the father's request to terminate payments. It emphasized the child’s inability to achieve self-sufficiency due to disability and criticized the mother’s repeated disclosure failures, while setting clear guidelines for future support and expense sharing.
Nasrollahzadeh v. Akhtari, 2025 ONSC 3028 - Justice Himel
This family law case addressed property division, enforcement of a Mehr under Ontario law, and child and spousal support. The Court ordered the sale of the matrimonial home, awarded the father $140,000, and dismissed his spousal support claim. The Mehr was enforceable, but equalization was adjusted for fairness.
Joseph v. John, 2025 ONSC 3186 - Justice Daurio
In a family law case, the Court struck the Respondent's pleadings due to willful non-compliance with financial disclosure obligations, persistent delays, and failure to adhere to court orders, allowing the Applicant to proceed to an uncontested trial.
DiBlasi v. DiBlasi, 2025 ONSC 2750 - Justice Jarvis
In a matrimonial property dispute, the Court set the valuation date as August 3, 2013, rejecting the husband's earlier date claim. It extended the wife's time to pursue an equalization claim, finding her delay was in good faith and caused no substantial prejudice to the husband.
