Ontario Civil


Appeal

FINAL OR INTERLOCUTORY ORDER
Order against non-party lawyers could not be severed from judgment

On January 19, 2014, court dismissed respondent’s motion to set aside judgment against her for $1.2 million. Court awarded costs on substantial indemnity basis against respondent, but dismissed appellant’s motion for costs payable by lawyers for respondent on personal basis resulting from allegations that lawyers knew affidavit respondent had put before court was false. Appellant moved before Divisional Court for leave to appeal costs order to Divisional Court. Respondent claimed that Divisional Court did not have jurisdiction to hear appellant’s motion for leave to appeal to Divisional Court. Motion for leave to appeal dismissed. Order respecting costs was final and not interlocutory. In result, leave to appeal must be obtained from Court of Appeal and Divisional Court had no jurisdiction to entertain appeal. It did not matter that order sought was against non-party lawyers. Order of costs against non-party lawyers was made as part of judgment and could not be severed or segregated from that judgment.

Grewal v. Sidhu (Oct. 27, 2014, Ont. S.C.J., MacKenzie J., File No. DC-14-10-ML) 246 A.C.W.S. (3d) 586.

Law Times Poll


A group of benchers opposed to the Statement of Principles will need to win the support of their colleagues to repeal the requirement. Do you think they will be successful in repealing the statement of principles in the coming year?
RESULTS ❯