In Kideckel v. Kideckel, the Court denied a motion to extend time to perfect two appeals from a defamation judgment and an order striking the moving party’s action, holding that the justice of the case did not warrant an extension because the proposed appeals lacked merit.
In 2609413 Ontario Inc. v. Brant, the Ontario Court upheld summary judgment for the respondent purchaser, finding that a second $300,000 consulting payment was expressly contingent on the purchaser receiving a cultivation licence. Since the cultivation licence was never received, the payment was not owing and the mortgage securing it was therefore properly discharged.
In Wiebe v. Smith, the Court denied an extension of time to appeal where the proposed appeal lacked merit, even though the failure to appeal on time was solely as a result of the failure by the proposed appellant’s counsel to file the notice of appeal on time and there was no real prejudice to the respondent.
In E.L.R. v D.M.S., a family law proceeding, the Court dismissed the husband’s motion to extend time to perfect his appeal from an order that upheld the striking of his pleadings, noting his persistent, egregious and unexplained non‑compliance with disclosure and costs orders. Applying the established extension test, the Court found that while the husband maintained an intention to appeal, the delay was unjustified, prejudice to the respondents was significant, and the moving party’s protracted litigation misconduct undermined confidence in the administration of justice.
In Icetrading Inc. v. Trayanov, the Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, concluding that the motion judge erred in finding a breach of contract and good faith and fair dealing.