|
Appeals - No Appeal of Unopposed Orders. Lahey v. Lahey
In Lahey v. Lahey (Ont CA, 2024) the Ontario Court of Appeal notes the general rule that appeals are not allowed from uncontested proceedings:[10] This court will not typically hear appeals from uncontested proceedings, although it has discretion to do so: Matos v. Driesman, 2024 ONCA 271, at para. 10, Lamothe v. Ellis, 2022 ONCA 789, 79 R.F.L. (8th) 8, at para. 3. But the moving parties have not brought my attention to any exceptional circumstances that would justify an exercise of my discretion in their favour. Indeed, had the appeal been timely, the responding parties would have been able to bring a motion quashing the appeal on this very basis. . Matos v. Driesman
In Matos v. Driesman (Ont CA, 2024) the Ontario Court of Appeal granted a motion to quash an appeal, here where a party whose pleadings were struck as they did not have standing to file an appeal:[16] The narrow and determinative issue before this court is whether the fact that the father’s pleadings have been struck precludes his right to appeal.
[17] This court in Lamothe, at para. 3, held that it “will not typically hear an appeal by a party from an unopposed proceeding” because “[p]articipation in an appeal after an uncontested trial has been ordered can circumvent that order, contrary to the interests of justice.”
[18] The court in that case recognized, at para. 3, that there may be exceptions to this rule where the issues raised in the appeal have clear merit or show that an injustice has been done.
....
[26] Allowing the father to bring this appeal would permit him to undermine and circumvent the Order, affirmed by this court, denying him the ability to engage directly with the issues in this case due to his non-disclosure. To permit this would, in our view, be contrary to the interests of justice. . Fatahi-Ghandehari v. Wilson
In Fatahi-Ghandehari v. Wilson (Ont CA, 2022) the Court of Appeal cites the general rule that appeals of unopposed orders below are not allowed:[13] On the first point, it is an important consideration that Mr. Wilson is seeking to extend the time for an appeal that this court will not ordinarily even hear. This court will not typically hear an appeal from an unopposed order because of concerns that it would be contrary to the interests of justice for an appeal to proceed in these circumstances: Lamothe v. Ellis, 2022 ONCA 789. This case falls within that general rule.
[14] The May 2021 Judgment was rendered after a trial in which Mr. Wilson did not participate because an order was made, in September 2018, denying him that participation as a consequence of the contempt finding against him. The September 2018 Order was not successfully appealed. As this court stated in Lamothe, at para. 3: “[p]articipation in an appeal after an uncontested trial has been ordered can circumvent that order, contrary to the interests of justice”. It would allow a party “to engage indirectly in issues that he was denied participation in through an order that he has not appealed”.
[15] There can be circumstances in which this court will grant an exception from its general practice of refusing to entertain an appeal from an unopposed order: see Lamothe, at para. 3; Peerenboom v. Peerenboom, 2020 ONCA 240, 446 D.L.R. (4th) 418, at para. 56. But I do not see any that are arguably present here.
|
