Dismissed (4)

Criminal Law: Sexual Touching 

Hernandez-Lopez v. R., 2020 BCCA 12 (39090)
The Applicant was supervising a residential daycare operated by his wife when he was charged with sexual touching of the complainant, who was under five years old at the time. The Applicant was convicted of one count of sexual touching of a person under the age of 16. The C.A. dismissed the conviction appeal. “The application for leave to appeal…is dismissed.”

Criminal Law: Sexual Assault 

J.M.E. v. R., 2019 ABCA 476 (39104)
There is a publication ban in this case, in the context of a conviction of sexual assault of a minor. “The motion for an extension of time to serve and file the application for leave to appeal is granted. The application for leave to appeal…is dismissed.”

Family Law: Hague Convention 

J.M. v. I.L., 2020 NBCA 14 (39167)
The Applicant father is an American citizen who resided in Texas. The mother a Canadian citizen who resided in New Brunswick for most of her life. In 2016, she took a leave of absence from her job as a teacher and went to Texas to work on a horse ranch. The parties became involved in a relationship and the mother moved into the father’s home. Their child was born in Texas in September 2017. By the summer of 2018, the parties agreed the mother should temporarily return to New Brunswick to resume her employment as a teacher for the full school year. She and the child took up residence with the maternal grandparents in New Brunswick and the mother resumed her teaching career. The father obtained an ex parte order declaring the child was a resident of Texas and the courts in Texas would have jurisdiction. The father subsequently visited twice in New Brunswick and the mother visited twice in Texas before the parties ended their relationship in February 2019 while the mother was in New Brunswick with the child. The father immediately revoked his consent for the child to remain in Canada. The mother commenced an application for sole custody. The father brought an application under the Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, Can. T.S. 1983 No. 35, to have the child returned to Texas. His application was dismissed and the C.A. dismissed his appeal. “The application for leave to appeal…is dismissed with costs.”

Real Property: Specific Performance; Undisclosed Principals 

Hothi v. De Cotiis2019 BCCA 472 (39080)
A property registered in the name of Mr. G. Hothi was sold to Mr. V. De Cotiis. The sale was negotiated and agreed to by Mr. P. Hothi, who was the head of a family business that included the buying and selling of real estate. Mr. G. Hothi held legal title to the property as the bare trustee for the benefit of the Hothi family, subject to the direction and control of Mr. P. Hothi, who was acting as the representative for the family. Mr. P. Hothi had entered into the agreement as agent for certain family members who were beneficial owners of the property under what was found at trial to be a resulting trust. However, Mr. P. Hothi denied the existence of a binding agreement of sale refused to close. Mr. De Cotiis began an action to enforce the contract for the purchase of the property against Mr. P. Hothi and Mr. G. Hothi. Mr. P. Hothi filed a second action against Mr. Batal and AHR for any damages payable as a result of the action launched by Mr. De Cotiis. Mr. G. Hothi also filed third party proceedings against Mr. P. Hothi. A fourth action was filed by Mr. Batal and AHR joining Mr. P. Hothi, Mr. G. Hothi and Ms. D. Hothi as fourth parties in the first action involving Mr. De Cotiis. The trial judge allowed Mr. De Cotiis’s action, ordering specific performance of the May 1, 2014 contract; dismissed Mr. P. Hothi and Mr. G. Hothi’s action against Mr. Batal and AHR; dismissed Mr. G. Hothi’s third party proceedings against Mr. P. Hothi; and dismissed Mr. Batal and AHR’s action joining the Hothi family as fourth parties; issues include undisclosed principal in an agency relationship. The C.A. dismissed two appeals filed by Mr. P. Hothi and a further appeal filed by Mr. G. Hothi. Only Mr. G. Hothi’s action is now in issue. “The application for leave to appeal…is dismissed with costs.”