Inzola Main Street Inc. v. Brampton (City of), 2017 ONSC 5392
Jurisdiction | Ontario |
Judge | Emery |
Citation | 2017 ONSC 5392 |
Court | Superior Court of Justice of Ontario (Canada) |
Docket Number | CV-15-2775-00A1 |
Date | 12 September 2017 |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
2 practice notes
-
Nelson v. Lavoie, 2018 ONSC 4489
...the motion for summary judgment. [49] The same result occurred in Dundas v. Zurich and Inzola Main Street v. Brampton (City of), 2017 ONSC 5392. [50] The second contentious element of this motion is s. 5(1)(a)(iv) of the Act: the proceeding must be an appropriate means to seek to remedy the......
-
Gionet v. Radford, 2018 ONSC 4810
...of a future loss is insufficient to trigger the commencement of the limitation period, citing Inzola Main Street Inc. v. Brampton (City), 2017 ONSC 5392 at para. 53; and IPEX Inc. v. Lubrizol Advanced Materials Canada Inc., 2012 ONSC 2717, 4 B.L.R. (5th) 148, at para. [30] ......
2 cases
-
Nelson v. Lavoie, 2018 ONSC 4489
...the motion for summary judgment. [49] The same result occurred in Dundas v. Zurich and Inzola Main Street v. Brampton (City of), 2017 ONSC 5392. [50] The second contentious element of this motion is s. 5(1)(a)(iv) of the Act: the proceeding must be an appropriate means to seek to remedy the......
-
Gionet v. Radford, 2018 ONSC 4810
...of a future loss is insufficient to trigger the commencement of the limitation period, citing Inzola Main Street Inc. v. Brampton (City), 2017 ONSC 5392 at para. 53; and IPEX Inc. v. Lubrizol Advanced Materials Canada Inc., 2012 ONSC 2717, 4 B.L.R. (5th) 148, at para. [30] ......