Birtzu v. McCron,

JurisdictionOntario
JudgeDoherty, Harvison Young and Thorburn JJ.A.
Citation2019 ONCA 777
Date02 October 2019
CourtCourt of Appeal (Ontario)
Docket NumberC66048

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
4 practice notes
  • Court Of Appeal Summaries (September 30-October 4)
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • October 23, 2019
    ...Sched 17, s 11(2), Cannabis Licence Act, 2018, SO 2018, c 12, Sched. 2, s 48(1) and (2), General, O Reg 468/18, s 8 3(3) Birtzu v McCron, 2019 ONCA 777 Keywords: Civil Procedure, Costs, Wills and Estates, Conversion, Capacity, Undue Influence, Suspicious Circumstances, Limitation Periods, S......
  • Przyk v. Hamilton Retirement Group Ltd. (The Court at Rushdale),
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Ontario)
    • April 28, 2021
    ...is based on irrelevant factors and overlooks relevant ones: rr. 57.01(4), 57.01(2); Bell Canada, at paras. 20, 41-42; Birtzu v. McCron, 2019 ONCA 777, 438 D.L.R. (4th) 141 at paras. 10-17, [14] The trial judge cited what he termed the “normative or default approach” that costs should follow......
  • Hobson v. Turner,
    • Canada
    • Superior Court of Justice of Ontario (Canada)
    • October 3, 2022
    ...not punish the defendants for their misleading evidence. He referred me to the decision of the Court of Appeal in Birtzu v. McCron, 2019 ONCA 777. In this case a daughter succeeded in defending her father’s will that left his estate to her. Her brothers had attacked the will. The tri......
  • Metropolitan Toronto Condominium Corporation No. 905 v Davies,
    • Canada
    • Superior Court of Justice of Ontario (Canada)
    • June 7, 2024
    ...instead of a ‘grocery list’ of costs factors, there should be an explanation for departing from the default rule: Birtzu v. McCron, 2019 ONCA 777, at paras. 39 In this case, the factor that overrides the default rule is found in rule 57.01(1)(b), the apportionment of liability. The only rea......
3 cases
  • Przyk v. Hamilton Retirement Group Ltd. (The Court at Rushdale),
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Ontario)
    • April 28, 2021
    ...is based on irrelevant factors and overlooks relevant ones: rr. 57.01(4), 57.01(2); Bell Canada, at paras. 20, 41-42; Birtzu v. McCron, 2019 ONCA 777, 438 D.L.R. (4th) 141 at paras. 10-17, [14] The trial judge cited what he termed the “normative or default approach” that costs should follow......
  • Hobson v. Turner,
    • Canada
    • Superior Court of Justice of Ontario (Canada)
    • October 3, 2022
    ...not punish the defendants for their misleading evidence. He referred me to the decision of the Court of Appeal in Birtzu v. McCron, 2019 ONCA 777. In this case a daughter succeeded in defending her father’s will that left his estate to her. Her brothers had attacked the will. The tri......
  • Metropolitan Toronto Condominium Corporation No. 905 v Davies,
    • Canada
    • Superior Court of Justice of Ontario (Canada)
    • June 7, 2024
    ...instead of a ‘grocery list’ of costs factors, there should be an explanation for departing from the default rule: Birtzu v. McCron, 2019 ONCA 777, at paras. 39 In this case, the factor that overrides the default rule is found in rule 57.01(1)(b), the apportionment of liability. The only rea......
1 firm's commentaries
  • Court Of Appeal Summaries (September 30-October 4)
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • October 23, 2019
    ...Sched 17, s 11(2), Cannabis Licence Act, 2018, SO 2018, c 12, Sched. 2, s 48(1) and (2), General, O Reg 468/18, s 8 3(3) Birtzu v McCron, 2019 ONCA 777 Keywords: Civil Procedure, Costs, Wills and Estates, Conversion, Capacity, Undue Influence, Suspicious Circumstances, Limitation Periods, S......