Find below recently published Halton decisions, available for free through CanLII.org.
Civil Matters
RBC v. John (2025 ONSC 5073)
The Court awarded $15,000 in costs to the successful party in a loan collection case, applying enhanced costs due to contractual terms. The defendant's delays and meritless counterclaim influenced the decision, but the award was slightly reduced to reflect one loan's lower cost provision.
Justice M. Kurz
Monteith & Sutherland v Novex Insurance (2025 ONSC 4697)
The Court ruled that the insurer must fully indemnify the insured for a settlement under a professional liability policy. The claim fell within the policy's coverage, was assigned to the correct policy period, and no substantial breach of the duty to co-operate was found.
Justice C. Chang
Criminal Matters
R. v. Britton (2025 ONSC 5177)
The Court sentenced the offender to 8 years' imprisonment for two historical sexual assaults, emphasizing denunciation, deterrence, and rehabilitation while considering mitigating factors, including remorse and rehabilitation efforts, and aggravating factors, such as the severity of the offences. A 20-year SOIRA order was also imposed.
Justice C. Conlan
R. v. Mitchell (2025 ONSC 5133)
The Court sentenced the Accused to 10 years' imprisonment for manslaughter and Fentanyl trafficking, emphasizing denunciation, deterrence, and proportionality. Mitigating factors included guilty pleas, lack of prior record, and harsh pretrial custody conditions. Aggravating factors included firearm use, drug trafficking, and the insidious nature of Fentanyl.
Justice C. Conlan
R. v. Banks (2025 ONSC 4909)
The Court sentenced the Accused to a conditional sentence of two years less a day for mid-level cocaine trafficking and possession of proceeds of crime. The decision emphasized rehabilitation, mitigating factors, and the Accused's positive efforts, despite the seriousness of the offences and aggravating factors.
Justice C. Conlan
Court of Appeal Decisions of Local Interest
R.L. v. M.F. (2025 ONCA 595)
The Court upheld a spousal support order of $20,000/month for 9.5 years, finding entitlement based on compensatory and non-compensatory grounds, despite the recipient's high income. The appellant's arguments regarding quantum, duration, and post-separation income sharing were rejected, with the trial judge's discretion and analysis deemed reasonable. Appeal dismissed.
Justice M. Kurz
