2279088 Ontario Inc. v. Nisbet,

JurisdictionOntario
JudgeLauwers,Huscroft,Trotter
Citation2018 ONCA 897
Date09 November 2018
CourtCourt of Appeal (Ontario)
Docket NumberC65227

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex
3 practice notes
  • Ontario Court Of Appeal Summaries (November 5 - 9, 2018)
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • 15 Noviembre 2018
    ...Review, Limitations Act, 2002, S.O. 2002, c. 24, Schedule B, Longo v. MacLaren Art Centre, 2014 ONCA 526 2279088 Ontario Inc. v. Nisbet, 2018 ONCA 897 Keywords: Real Property, Adverse Possession, Trespass, Masidon Investments Ltd. v. Ham (1984), 45 O.R. (3d) 563 (C.A.), leave to appeal refu......
  • Jamnisek v. The Estate of Gordan A. Wyant
    • Canada
    • Superior Court of Justice of Ontario (Canada)
    • 19 Febrero 2021
    ...party in possession mistakenly believe that that the party in possession owns the property at issue. See: 2279088 Ontario Inc. v. Nisbet, 2018 ONCA 897, at para. [46]        In the circumstances of this case, the applicants intended to exclude all others f......
  • Claim For Adverse Possession Of Land Against An Unknown Owner
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • 9 Marzo 2021
    ...and the party in possession mistakenly believe that the party in possession owns the property at issue: 2279088 Ontario Inc. v. Nisbet, 2018 ONCA 897, at para. Here, and as is common in claims of adverse possession, the court found that mutual mistake between the parties had occurred. The a......
1 cases
  • Jamnisek v. The Estate of Gordan A. Wyant,
    • Canada
    • Superior Court of Justice of Ontario (Canada)
    • 19 Febrero 2021
    ...party in possession mistakenly believe that that the party in possession owns the property at issue. See: 2279088 Ontario Inc. v. Nisbet, 2018 ONCA 897, at para. [46]        In the circumstances of this case, the applicants intended to exclude all others f......
2 firm's commentaries
  • Ontario Court Of Appeal Summaries (November 5 - 9, 2018)
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • 15 Noviembre 2018
    ...Review, Limitations Act, 2002, S.O. 2002, c. 24, Schedule B, Longo v. MacLaren Art Centre, 2014 ONCA 526 2279088 Ontario Inc. v. Nisbet, 2018 ONCA 897 Keywords: Real Property, Adverse Possession, Trespass, Masidon Investments Ltd. v. Ham (1984), 45 O.R. (3d) 563 (C.A.), leave to appeal refu......
  • Claim For Adverse Possession Of Land Against An Unknown Owner
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • 9 Marzo 2021
    ...and the party in possession mistakenly believe that the party in possession owns the property at issue: 2279088 Ontario Inc. v. Nisbet, 2018 ONCA 897, at para. Here, and as is common in claims of adverse possession, the court found that mutual mistake between the parties had occurred. The a......