Find below recently published Halton decisions, available for free through CanLII.org.
Criminal Matters
R. v. X.Y., (2026 ONSC 584)
In a domestic violence trial, the accused was acquitted on all charges as the complainant's testimony was deemed unreliable and insufficient to meet the standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
Justice C. Conlan
Keller Williams Realty v. VIP Realty Inc. (2025 ONSC 7152)
The Court granted an injunction enforcing restrictive covenants in franchise agreements, finding them reasonable and necessary to protect the franchisor's proprietary interests. The defendants' breaches, including joining a competitor during the agreement's term, caused irreparable harm to the franchisor's goodwill and franchise system.
Justice M. Kurz
R. v. Kumar, (2026 ONCJ 33)
The Court convicted the accused of multiple counts of fraud over $5000, rejecting claims of reasonable doubt and Charter delay violations. The Court found the accused intentionally misused funds, depriving victims of financial benefits, while dismissing a Section 11(b) application as the trial concluded within the Jordan ceiling.
Justice J. Campitelli
R. v. Radwanski, (2026 ONCJ 44)
The Court found a minor Charter breach due to an unexplained roadside delay in facilitating access to counsel. However, the breath samples were admitted as the breach was not serious, had minimal impact on the accused's rights, and the evidence was reliable and crucial to the case.
Justice P. Maund
Halton Hills (Town) v. Gordon, (2026 ONCJ 63)
The Court upheld a conviction for failing to comply with a Property Standards Order, ruling that challenging the underlying by-law's validity constituted an impermissible collateral attack. The appellant's arguments on vagueness and legal non-conforming use were dismissed, as they should have been raised through the prescribed appeal process.
Justice B. Puddington
Civil Matters
Equitable Bank v. Mian, (2026 ONSC 467)
The Court granted summary judgment in a mortgage default case, finding no genuine issue requiring a trial. The defendants failed to provide evidence supporting their defences, including claims of fraud and unconscionability, and admitted to defaulting on payments. The plaintiff was awarded the outstanding mortgage amount and costs.
Justice M. Kurz
Handy v. M&C Investments Incorporated, (2026 ONSC 648)
In a wrongful dismissal case, the Court ordered the Plaintiff to provide a better affidavit of documents regarding mitigation efforts, finding prior disclosures incomplete and inconsistent with procedural obligations. The Court emphasized the importance of full disclosure to avoid prejudicing the Defendant's ability to conduct discovery effectively.
Associate Justice A. Glick
Folino v. Shahid, (2026 ONSC 841)
In a mortgage enforcement case, the Court allowed limited amendments to the defence and granted leave to issue a third-party claim. Allegations of fiduciary duty and misrepresentation against the lender were dismissed as untenable, while claims of unconscionability were permitted to proceed. Procedural fairness was preserved with a compressed timetable.
Associate Justice A. Glick
Court of Appeal Decisions of Local Interest
Foodies Curry & Shawarma Inc. v. Royal Paan Leasing Ltd., (2026 ONCA 26)
The Court set aside a judgment awarding restitution for unjust enrichment, finding the claim was not properly pleaded, the record insufficient, and the appellant denied a fair opportunity to respond. The matter remains unresolved pending further proceedings.
Justice C. Chang
R. v. A.D.H., (2026 ONCA 41)
The Court dismissed the appeal, finding no ineffective assistance of counsel. The appellant's proposed evidence lacked the specificity required for admissibility under the s. 276 framework, failing both stages of the test. Consequently, the appellant could not establish prejudice under the ineffective assistance of counsel standard.
Justice K. Coats
Nunes v. Nunes, (2026 ONCA 54)
The Court dismissed an appeal challenging summary judgment, finding no evidence to support claims that $230,000 was a gift or repayable by a third party. The appellants failed to identify errors in the motion judge's findings or risks of contradictory outcomes. Costs of $10,000 were awarded to the respondent.
Justice J. Mills
Le v. Norris, (2026 ONCA 71)
Justice M. Kurz
