i
CITED 141 O.R. (3d) RENVOI 141 R.J.O. (3e)
CASES REPORTED
Aquilina c. Aquilina ................................................................................ (S.C.J.) 634
Aquilina v. Aquilina.................................................................................(S.C.J.) 627
Popack v. Lipszyc ...................................................................................... (C.A.) 561
Prescott v. Barbon .................................................................................... (C.A.) 616
Stewart v. Douro-Dummer (Township) ...............................................(S.C.J.) 583
ARBITRATION
Award — Enforcement — Parties submitting commercial dispute
to arbitration by New York rabbinical court — Arbitration
agreement precluding any right of appeal — Arbitrator issu-
ing award in favour of applicant in amount significantly less
than that which he had sought — Applicant applying unsuc-
cessfully to set aside award — Applicant then applying under
arts. 35 and 36 of UNCITRAL Model Law on International
Commercial Arbitration for recognition and enforcement of
award — Application judge erring in finding that award was
“not yet binding” on parties — Award framed as final — Arbi-
trator’s potential jurisdiction to entertain respondent’s claim
for costs of applicant’s set aside proceedings not affecting
binding nature of award.
POPACK V. LIPSZYC ............................................................. (C.A.) 561
CIVIL PROCEDURE
Administrative dismissal — Setting aside — Plaintiffs’ action dis-
missed as abandoned in August 2011 pursuant to rule 48.15 of
Rules of Civil Procedure — Plaintiffs moving in February
2014 to set aside dismissal — Master erring in taking into
account fact that rule 48.15 had been repealed by the time
motion was heard and in finding that delay in moving to set
aside was not inordinate owing to subsequent amendments to
rule 48.14 — Master also erring in finding that defendants
were at fault for not filing defence — Master’s finding that
plaintiffs had always intended to prosecute their claim unreasonable in absence of any evidence to that effect — Master
failing to consider finality principle in his analysis of prejudice
to defendants — Plaintiffs’ appeal from order of Superior
Court judge setting aside dismissal dismissed — Rules of Civil
Procedure, R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194, rules 48.14, 48.15.
PRESCOTT V. BARBON ......................................................... (C.A.) 616
DROIT DE LA FAMILLE
Biens — Égalisation des biens familiaux nets — Choix — Conjoint
survivant présentant une requête en prorogation du délai
accordé pour exercer le choix de recevoir un paiement
d’égalisation en vertu de la Loi sur le droit de la famille ou de
jouir des droits prévus par la Loi portant réforme du droit des
successions — Requête accueillie — Administration d’une
succession internationale complexe s’avérant difficile — La
requérante demande un délai supplémentaire pour réunir des
connaissances raisonnables à partir desquelles faire un choix
éclairé — Retard explicable et encouru de bonne foi — Proro-
gation du délai causant un préjudice minimal à la succession
