|
Interest - CJA Rates (2). Alyousef v. Alyousef
In Alyousef v. Alyousef (Ont CA, 2026) the Ontario Court of Appeal (mostly) dismissed an appeal (and cross-appeal), this brought against "the trial judge’s award of damages, ordered as an oppression remedy under s. 248 of the Ontario Business Corporations Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. B.16 (“OBCA”); for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty and duty of loyalty; and for unjust enrichment. They also dispute the calculation of prejudgment interest and costs.".
Here the court considers prejudgment interest [under the CJA s.128-130]:[20] As for the question of prejudgment interest, the provisions of s. 130(1) of the Courts of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.43, permit the trial judge a wide discretion to allow prejudgment interest as he saw fit, including under (c) to “allow interest for a period other than that provided in [s. 128]”. Absent reversible error, the trial judge’s calculation of prejudgment interest is entitled to substantial deference on appeal. . ID Inc. v. Toronto Wholesale Produce Association [pleadings]
In ID Inc. v. Toronto Wholesale Produce Association (Ont CA, 2025) the Ontario Court of Appeal allows an appeal, here from trial orders of a declaration of breached contract and damages.
Here the court notes that when seeking to vary from the CJA-prescribed interest rates, that should be so pled:[64] It remains the fact that if a party wishes to claim interest at a rate other than under the CJA, it must advance that claim in its pleading. A boilerplate claim for interest under the CJA does not fulfill that requirement nor does it provide a pathway for the court to award interest other than as stipulated by the CJA. Failing to plead that separate right to interest also does not comply with the requirements of r. 25.06(9) of the Rules of Civil Procedure, R.R.O., 1990, Reg. 194 which reads, in part:Where a pleading contains a claim for relief, the nature of the relief claimed shall be specified ... .
|
