Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 25 FEBRUARY 2025

Plaintiff Obtains Summary Judgment Against Former Lawyers (Longarini v. Llyod)

Gardiner Roberts LLP
Gardiner Roberts LLP
Contributor
Explore more from Gardiner Roberts LLP

Motions for summary judgment are often ill-suited for disputes where there are contested issues involving credibility and material facts. However, under Rules 20.04(2.1) and (2.2) of the Ontario Rules of Civil Procedure...

CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

Motions for summary judgment are often ill-suited for disputes where there are contested issues involving credibility and material facts. However, under Rules 20.04(2.1) and (2.2) of the Ontario Rules of Civil Procedure, a motion judge can determine if the need for a trial can be avoided by weighing the evidence, evaluating the credibility of a deponent, or drawing any reasonable inference from the evidence. The motion judge may use those powers, at their discretion, to reach a conclusion that they see to be in the interest of justice, as demonstrated by the decision in Longarini v. Llyod, 2025 ONSC 974 (CanLII).

The plaintiff in the case was a 50 percent shareholder in a company which operated legal cannabis dispensaries. She had been embroiled in a dispute with the other 50 percent shareholder which resulted in litigation, including an application under the Ontario Business Corporations Act (OBCA), a defamation action, and a Human Rights Tribunal application. The

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from