Notable Cases



** Unedited **
Indexed as:
358426 Ontario Ltd. v. Liappas (Trustee of)
358426 Ontario Limited, 681124 Ontario Limited and Mortgage
Connections Ltd., plaintiffs (appellants), and
David T. Murdoch Reciever and Trustee Limited, trustee of the
bankrupts Photis Liappas and Despina Liappas, 855469 Ontario
Limited and Cunningham, Swan, Carty, Little and Bonham,
defendants (respondents)
[1997] O.J. No. 4962
DRS 98-12571
Court File No. C19900
Ontario Court of Appeal
Toronto, Ontario
Carthy, Abella JJ.A. and Borins J. (ad hoc)
December 10, 1997.
(2 pp.)
On appeal from Platana J.

Practice — Appeals — Restrictions on argument on appeal.


Appeal by the plaintiffs from trial judgment. At issue was the credibility of the evidence concerning production of the estoppel certificates.


HELD: Appeal dismissed. The trial judge’s reasons addressed the arguments of the appellants on the credibility issue and the court was not prepared to consider the appellants’ revised argument and to retry the action.




J. Gardner Hodder, for the appellants.
Michael Royce, for the respondents.
The judgment of the Court was delivered by


¶ 1 CARTHY J.A. (endorsement):— We have reviewed the submissions of trial counsel for the plaintiffs and the reasons of the trial judge are a direct response thereto, centering upon the credibility issue as to the production of estoppel certificates. We are not prepared to consider the appeal on a revised argument because to do so in this case is to retry the action.


¶ 2 The appeal is dismissed with costs.



– further cases

  • A. v. A. (1992), 38 R.F.L. 382 (Ont.Gen.Div) – This case has been referred to a number of times in programs of Continuing Legal Education as an example of how to neutralize the opinion evidence of an expert. The result of the case was novel, as well. John Syrtash, author of Religion and Culture in Canadian Family Law, called the printers and stopped the presses so that his book could make mention of the result in this case.


  • Erinway Holdings v. Barrette [1991] O.J. No. 751 – Landlord/Tenant case.


  • 419212 Ontario Ltd. v. Environmental Compensation Corp. [1990] O.J. No. 2006 – A claim for compensation in an environmental matter.
  • Homes v. Singh [1989] O.J. No. 2657 DRS 94-06165 – Breach of contract.


  • R. v. C. (T.) Ontario Judgments: [1988] O.J. No. 2402 – Rights of young offenders.


  • Byrne v. Purolator Courier Ltd. [1987] O.J. No. 2261 No. 299/86 – Breach of contract.


  • Lila v. Lila (1986), 3 R.F.L. 226 (Ont.C.A.) – This was a family matter decided by the Ontario Court of Appeal. It was included for many years in the Bar Admission Course materials on Family Law for the proposition it established concerning entitlement to interim support where there is an allegation of a fundamental repudiation of the marriage.


  • Caleb v. Potts [1986] O.J. No. 1125 – A Real Estate agent’s liability case.


  • Siduak (c.o.b. P.M. Industries) v. Mironovich (c.o.b. Fashion Gem Imports) [1986] O.J. No. 1953 DRS 94-01126 – Breach of Contract.


  • Jewell v. Zorkin (1986), 4 W.D.C.P. 49 (Ont.Master) – This case concerned an interesting point of pleading in the area of libel law.


  • R. v. Albino, Oct. 16, 1987, Ontario Lawyers’ Weekly – This case concerned an interesting point of criminal procedure asserting an accused’s right of election with respect to indictable offences.



Let’s Work Together