McNeil v. Barrett, 2018 ONSC 212
| Jurisdiction | Ontario |
| Judge | MITROW J. |
| Citation | 2018 ONSC 212 |
| Docket Number | DC18/17 |
| Court | Superior Court of Justice of Ontario (Canada) |
| Date | 17 January 2018 |
-
- 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
5 practice notes
-
COURT OF APPEAL SUMMARIES (February 15 ' February 19, 2021)
...3 O.R. (3d) 705 (C.A.), Perlmutter v. Smith, 2020 ONCA 570, Riverview-Trenton Railroad Company v. Michigan Department of Transportation, 2018 ONSC 212, Appeal Enterprises Ltd. v. First National Bank of Chicago (1984), 10 D.L.R. (4th) 317 (Ont. C.A.), Local Court of Stuttgart of the Federal ......
-
Levesque v. Windsor, 2020 ONSC 3110
...v. Pillitteri, 2013 CarswellOnt 16731 (Ont. C.A.); Closner v. Closner, 2019 ONSC 703. [46] Mitrow J. points out in McNeil v. Barrett, 2018 ONSC 212 that even at the level of the Ontario Court of Appeal decisions differ in the use of one or other of these phrases. This may suggest that there......
-
Levesque v. Windsor, 2020 ONSC 2677
...10. The Respondent mother also relies on the decision in McNeil v Barrett 2018 ONSC 212. That was a decision of the Divisional Court on a motion to stay. The decision in McNeil v Barrett is consistent with the principle that both t......
-
Vasilodimitrakis v. Homme, 2020 ONSC 2355
...“serious issue” test given past decisions of the Court of Appeal for Ontario. I had discussed this issue more fully in McNeil v. Barrett, 2018 ONSC 212 (Div. Ct.)[1], a case relied on by the respondent. [51] In Circuit World Corp. v. Lesperance, 1997 CarswellOnt 1840 (Ont. C.A. [In Chambers......
Request a trial to view additional results
4 cases
-
Levesque v. Windsor, 2020 ONSC 3110
...v. Pillitteri, 2013 CarswellOnt 16731 (Ont. C.A.); Closner v. Closner, 2019 ONSC 703. [46] Mitrow J. points out in McNeil v. Barrett, 2018 ONSC 212 that even at the level of the Ontario Court of Appeal decisions differ in the use of one or other of these phrases. This may suggest that there......
-
Levesque v. Windsor, 2020 ONSC 2677
...10. The Respondent mother also relies on the decision in McNeil v Barrett 2018 ONSC 212. That was a decision of the Divisional Court on a motion to stay. The decision in McNeil v Barrett is consistent with the principle that both t......
-
Vasilodimitrakis v. Homme, 2020 ONSC 2355
...“serious issue” test given past decisions of the Court of Appeal for Ontario. I had discussed this issue more fully in McNeil v. Barrett, 2018 ONSC 212 (Div. Ct.)[1], a case relied on by the respondent. [51] In Circuit World Corp. v. Lesperance, 1997 CarswellOnt 1840 (Ont. C.A. [In Chambers......
-
Paquette v. Middlebrook-Crowder, 2020 ONSC 5153
...phraseology to describe what raises a “serious question”: Moffat v. Miller, 2014 ONSC 6649, at para. 13; McNeil v. Barrett, 2018 ONSC 212 (Div. Ct.), at paras. 25-35; Levesque v. Windsor, 2020 ONSC 3110, at paras. 43-46. Before me, the parties relied on jurisprudence using the......
1 firm's commentaries
-
COURT OF APPEAL SUMMARIES (February 15 ' February 19, 2021)
...3 O.R. (3d) 705 (C.A.), Perlmutter v. Smith, 2020 ONCA 570, Riverview-Trenton Railroad Company v. Michigan Department of Transportation, 2018 ONSC 212, Appeal Enterprises Ltd. v. First National Bank of Chicago (1984), 10 D.L.R. (4th) 317 (Ont. C.A.), Local Court of Stuttgart of the Federal ......