Fulop v. Corrigan
| Jurisdiction | Ontario |
| Court | Superior Court of Justice of Ontario (Canada) |
| Judge | PERELL |
| Citation | 2020 ONSC 1648 |
| Docket Number | CV-11-423910 |
| Date | 20 March 2020 |
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock 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
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
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
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
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
Start Your 7-day Trial
24 practice notes
-
Algarawi v. Berger; and Porter v. Sutandar
...[1994] 2 S.C.R. 9 at para. 22. [9] Bee Vectoring Technology Inc. v. Chitiz Pathak LLP, 2019 ONSC 1714, at para. 74; Fulop v. Corrigan, 2020 ONSC 1648 at para. 74; Leadbeater v. Ontario (2004), 70 O.R. (3d) 224 (S.C.J.), at para. [10] R. v. White, 2011 SCC 13, [2011] 1 S.C.R. 433, at para. 3......
-
Paunovski v. Risteski et al.
...[18] The approach to leave under r. 48.04 was set out by Perell J. in Fulop v. Corrigan, 2020 ONSC 1648: [76] Once a party has set an action down for trial, it is a matter of discretion in the particular circumstances of the case whether the court w......
-
Farid v. Brunt
...The test to be applied when considering granting leave is set out in Fulop v. Corrigan, 2020 ONSC 1648, [2020] O.J. No. 1227 at para 77 (S.C.J.), as i. what the par......
-
Global Fuels Inc. v. Econo Petroleum Inc.
...[1994] 2 S.C.R. 9 at para. 22. [4] Bee Vectoring Technology Inc. v. Chitiz Pathak LLP, 2019 ONSC 1714, at para. 74; Fulop v. Corrigan, 2020 ONSC 1648 at para. 74; Leadbeater v. Ontario (2004), 70 O.R. (3d) 224 (S.C.J.), at para.[4] Bee Vectoring Technology Inc. v. Chitiz Pathak LLP, 2019 ON......
Get Started for Free
20 cases
-
Algarawi v. Berger; and Porter v. Sutandar
...[1994] 2 S.C.R. 9 at para. 22. [9] Bee Vectoring Technology Inc. v. Chitiz Pathak LLP, 2019 ONSC 1714, at para. 74; Fulop v. Corrigan, 2020 ONSC 1648 at para. 74; Leadbeater v. Ontario (2004), 70 O.R. (3d) 224 (S.C.J.), at para. [10] R. v. White, 2011 SCC 13, [2011] 1 S.C.R. 433, at para. 3......
-
Paunovski v. Risteski et al.
...[18] The approach to leave under r. 48.04 was set out by Perell J. in Fulop v. Corrigan, 2020 ONSC 1648: [76] Once a party has set an action down for trial, it is a matter of discretion in the particular circumstances of the case whether the court w......
-
Farid v. Brunt
...The test to be applied when considering granting leave is set out in Fulop v. Corrigan, 2020 ONSC 1648, [2020] O.J. No. 1227 at para 77 (S.C.J.), as i. what the par......
-
Brown vs. Jagpal
...in the interests of justice.” The court declined to determine the appropriate test. [14] Though it predates Horani, in Fulop v Corrigan, 2020 ONSC 1648, at para. 77, Justice Perell helpfully sets out some of the factors to be considered in deciding whether to grant leave as The predominant ......
Get Started for Free
