Motion to Add Edward Furtak as a Defendant – Dismissed
The Plaintiff’s motion to add Edward Furtak as a Defendant was dismissed on March 23, 2015, by Belobaba J.
Han v Li, 2015 ONCA 193
Keith Landy represented the Han respondents at the Ontario Court of Appeal and successfully defended against this appeal. The case involved a fraudulent scheme involving transfer of real estate, and a default judgment against one of the defendants. http://canlii.ca/t/ggsvg
AE Hospitality Ltd. v. George, 2015 ONSC 1785
In AE Hospitality, the plaintiffs, represented by Keith Landy and Shawn Tock, successfully resisted a motion by the defendant to access funds that had been frozen under a Mareva injunction. The court found that the defendant, a bookkeeper who is alleged to have defrauded the plaintiffs, was unable to provide sufficient evidence to modify the…
Speaker’s Corner: Why judicial diversity matters
This past December’s round of judicial appointments by Justice Minister Peter MacKay has put the issue of judicial diversity squarely back in the spotlight. Law Times, February 2, 2015 Speaker’s Corner: Why judicial diversity matters
Mikhalenia v Drakshan, 2015 ONSC 1048
Represented by David Fogel, the Plaintiff Mikhalenia successfully brought a summary judgment motion to have Ms. Drakshan forfeit a $100,000 deposit to Mr. Mikhalenia for a failed real estate agreement. Mr. Mikhalenia was the owner of a property that Ms. Drakshan agreed to purchase, only to fail to close based on what she unsuccessfully alleged…
Massih v AMA Development, 2015 ONSC 539
In this motion for security for costs, David Fogel represented four of the defendants who successfully argued that the plaintiff should only be able to continue his action if security for the costs of the defendants was posted within 90 days. http://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/2015/2015onsc539/2015onsc539.html
CBC Video – N.W.T. Court Upholds Ruling Against Bell Mobility in 911 Case
From CBC News. Posted January 8, 2015.
CBC News – N.W.T. court upholds ruling against Bell Mobility in 911 case
The N.W.T. Court of Appeal has upheld a 2013 ruling that found Bell Mobility liable after charging customers in the territories for 911 services not available in their communities. Since around 2004, Bell Mobility charged all customers in N.W.T., Nunavut and Yukon the same 75 cents a month for 911 service it charged its customers…
The Globe and Mail – Bell loses appeal of class-action suit over non-existent 911 services
Bell Mobility Inc. has lost an appeal of a class-action judgment that found the company liable to thousands of cellphone subscribers in Canada’s three northern territories over fees for non-existent 911 services. The Northwest Territories Court of Appeal concluded that the trial judge, who presided over what was the territory’s first class-action lawsuit to go…
Landy Marr Kats Wins Class Action Appeal. Appeal Court Upholds Trial Decision
Justice Côté writing for the Court of Appeal dismissed Bell Mobility’s appeal of the trial judge’s ruling. The Court upheld the trial judge’s ruling that the company is liable to class members in the Northwest Territories, Yukon, and Nunavut who paid 911 fees without receiving any 911 operator service. Justice Côté did not accept Bell…