Sentences with phrase «trial judge found»

The trial judge found the Scherbaks liable for negligent misrepresentation and awarded Krawchuk damages of $ 110,000 in addition to the $ 105,000 she had recovered from her title insurer.

For example, in Ocean Trail Unit Owners Ass»n v. Mead [11], the trial judge found that board had exceeded its powers when it purchased property on behalf of the Condo Association and entered a judgment to that effect including an award of $ 194,079.37 in attorneys» fees to the lawyers representing the unit owners.

The trial judge found that the vendor was not in breach of contract, that the agreement gave the vendor the right to set the completion date and that the contract called for a forfeiture of the deposit and was enforceable.

The Colorado trial judge found that the children had thrived in the same school since preschool, were highly involved in community activities and school sports, enjoyed meaningful relationships with their half - brother in father's home and with their grandparents residing in the neighborhood, and that the father was a vital part of their lives.

«In short, the trial judge found that Many was not guilty of sexual abuse of the children, and that Teresa made it all up and planted the notion in the children's heads in order to alienate their father forever.»

The learned trial judge found that the children had been alienated from their mother by their father but, given Daniel's age at that time, the plaintiff's application for custody of Daniel was refused and the previous consent order that Daniel was to have access visits with his mother and attend counseling was set aside.

The trial judge found as a fact that the mother had alienated the son from the affection of his father.

The trial judge found that the duration of the subcontract should be for a five - season term.

The trial judge found they had breached their non-solicitation covenants.

A trial judge found the association liable, but the New Brunswick Court of Appeal overturned the finding.

Because the trial judge found that the three Ojeikere children were habitually resident in Nigeria, despite their time in boarding schools and despite their abduction to Ontario, s. 22 (1)(a) of the CLRA provides no basis for an Ontario court to assume jurisdiction over the children.

Envoy said that, once the trial judge found that if the bid had been properly conducted Envoy would have been awarded the contract for the relocation services, then Envoy's loss of profit on that contract was the proper measure of damages.

There was no evidence of abuse of process as the trial judge found no dishonesty in relation to the application for a peace bond.

Moreover, the trial judge found that the closing address of the respondent's trial counsel was inappropriate and inflammatory.

In a decision released in October 2014, the trial judge found that the plaintiff succeeded on each of its claims.

With respect to the post-sale subsequent mortgagees, the trial judge found that they were all deemed to have the same knowledge that Mr. Mohammed obtained by reason of his position as a director of 241 Ontario and his involvement with the post-sale subsequent mortgagees.

The trial judge found that the respondent had been constructively dismissed and defamed and ordered that the NOT be corrected.

The trial judge found that, because of the unfairness with which the Crown had conducted the RFP, the Crown had breached the contract that applied to the bidding process (Contract A in the Ron Engineering analysis) and Envoy Relocation Services was entitled to about $ 29 million in damages.

The court saw no basis for this court to interfere with the trial judge's conclusion.Although the trial judge erred in her characterization of the appellant's blog statement that the respondent was an anti-Semite as a statement of fact rather than opinion, the defence of fair comment could not apply if the statement was made, as the trial judge found, with malice.

The trial judge found that Ms. Draper was under no obligation to make out - of - pocket payments towards the mortgage and property taxes for Mr. Holtby's property.

Based on the evidence given by Mr. Richer and that of his passenger Mr. Moran, the GPS evidence, and the expert accident reconstruction evidence that she accepted, the trial judge found that: i) Mr. Richer was operating the bus at a rate of speed in excess of the posted speed limit ii) critically, Mr. Richer did not decelerate on his approach to the intersection; iii) the pre-impact speed of the bus exceeded 65.6 kilometres per hour after it entered the intersection; and iv) Mr. Richer was momentarily inattentive to the road ahead when he glanced left and then right, into the side mirrors of the City bus.

The trial judge found that if Moulton had been made aware of the threat, it could have made alternate arrangements to harvest timber.

With respect to the formation of the contracts, the trial judge found that the individual appellants were provided with a copy of the non-solicitation provisions before starting their employment.

The trial judge found that there was ample evidence demonstrating malice by the appellant.

The trial judge found that the appellant was motivated by express malice against Dr. Elmasry, and that he viewed the respondent and Dr. Elmasry «for all intents and purposes, as one and the same.»

The trial judge found as a fact that Mr. Moyse did not destroy relevant evidence.

However, the trial judge found that the underlying fact of the comment was that the respondent was acting as co-counsel, and that fact was not true.

The trial judge found that S.H.'s conduct occurred while he was in an automatistic state that was not caused by a mental disorder.

However, the trial judge found that the Appellant did not have goodwill in the acronym.

However, the trial judge found that Elections Canada undertook campaigns to inform voters and actively expanded the list of acceptable identification and that true cases of disenfranchisement were likely to be extremely rare.

The trial judge found the defendants to be credible and concluded that there was no basis for finding that any of the defendants made any promises or commitments to Mr. Mehedi that went unfulfilled.

The trial judge found that the eligibility period laid out by...

The trial judge found in favour of Grassy Narrows on all important issues, specifically that in the Keewatin Lands, Ontario could not «take up» lands and thereby limit harvesting rights without clearing it with Canada first.

After careful analysis, the trial judge found in favour of Loyola, holding that the decision of the Minister must be negated as it is both erroneous and unreasonable.

The Ministry subsequently applied under The Child and Family Services Act... for an order permanently committing T.J.E.S. to its care... [T] he learned trial judge found no basis to support the Ministry's warrantless apprehension of T.J.E.S.... The Ministry appeals that decision.

The trial judge found that he could do so, and a majority of the Court of Appeal agreed.

The trial judge found that it was proven that he was a party to the fraud.

The trial judge found that the swab was unconstitutional in that it did not meet the requirements of a warrantless search incident to arrest.

In the latter case, the trial judge found «that it is possible for there to be a deprivation of liberty without false imprisonment and vice versa» (per Sir Anthony Clarke, MR at [88]-RRB-.

The trial judge found that the parties» beneficial interests were equal.

[17]... the theory that the accused would have sent the e-mail as a result of the inducement offered by the police officer some five weeks earlier when, as the trial judge found, the officer appeared to imply that the accused would not be charged if he apologized for the sexual improprieties... Indeed the theory that there is some connection between the inadmissible confession and the e ‑ mail runs counter to S.G.T.'s own evidence and defence at trial that the contents of the e-mail had nothing to do with the allegations of sexual assault.

Moreover, the learned trial judge found that there were complaints which constituted actual notice to the district over several years prior to the accident and that the complaints protocol «was a haphazard, ineffective illusion».

Notwithstanding that the prior accidents did not all occur at the same curve or even at the same point in the subject curve, the accidents were similar in that the learned trial judge found that the accidents occurred not as a result of the curve in the road but as a result of the road's surface.

The Trial Judge found that Pee Wee and Free Fall were built in such a way that the «next logical progression» after coming off of Pee Wee was to proceed to Free Fall.

However, after a nine - day bench trial, the trial judge found in Utilities» favor.

The Trial Judge found that had the County been aware of the number of accidents occurring in the Obstacles Area, they would have taken steps that would have prevented the plaintiff's injury.

In relation to quantum, the trial judge found no reason to depart from the Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines («SSAGs»), and ordered support of $ 5,400 per month retroactive to July 1, 2013.

Here the trial judge found that the appellant had «essentially destroyed» her share of the investment portfolio which he characterized as having been «an income producing asset of the marriage» (para 13).

The trial judge found that Rabinowitz and Bergman were the controlling shareholders, directors, and directing minds of Artcraft, and that they authorized the use of company equipment and employees to perpetrate the internet defamation campaign and to try to conceal their involvement in it.

The trial judge found on the «unusual facts» of this case that Midland, the shareholder, did suffer a direct injury or loss by reason of the appellants» conduct.