Congratulations to Blaneys’ very own Reeva Finkel and Steve Kelly for the outcome they achieved for our client in Financial Services Regulatory Authority v. First Swiss Mortgage Corp. The Court upheld the lower court’s decision discharging a mortgage after finding that a mortgage corporation had acted as an agent when it accepted borrowers’ payout funds. Notwithstanding the failure of the agent to forward the money to the assignee of the mortgage, the Court ruled that the borrowers had properly paid off their loan, since they reasonably relied on the agent’s authority.
Aizic v. Natcan Trust Company addressed the interpretation of a certification order that required leave to commence “any other proceeding relating to the subject matter” of the certified class actions. The motion judge held that the leave requirements applied only to parties and class members of the certified actions, not to non-class members bringing different proposed class actions. The Court agreed and dismissed the appeal. Applying the text-context-purpose framework, the Court concluded that the orders were aimed at delineating the single class action that may proceed for the certified class, and that any ambiguity should be resolved narrowly to preserve a party’s right to sue.
In Richard v. Canada (Attorney General), the Court dismissed Canada’s appeal from a certification order in a proposed class action that challenged the CBSA’s use of provincial prisons to temporarily house immigration detainees. Applying the Class Proceedings Act framework and the “plain and obvious/bound to fail” standard to whether the claim discloses a reasonable cause of action, the Court upheld the certification of Charter claims under ss. 7, 9, 12, and 15, as well as a systemic negligence claim.
In Canadian Tire Corporation, Limited v. Eaton Equipment Ltd., the Court of Appeal largely upheld the summary judgment finding against Eaton Equipment, S.M., and related entities liable for a sophisticated civil fraud scheme that used falsified repair invoices routed through an intermediary administrator to extract over $3.2 million from Canadian Tire. However, the Court did set aside the judgment against C.M. for insufficient evidence of her knowledge of the fraud.
Amiri v. Nazer concerned an appeal from the trial judge’s final order following the parties’ family law trial. The Court dismissed the appeal, and upheld all findings in favour of the respondent, concluding that the trial judge acted fairly and within her discretion.
In Brady v. Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care the Court dismissed the appeal from the motion judge’s order, holding that the wrongful dismissal claim was commenced outside the two-year limitation period.