Her son died from drug overdose. He had two life insurance policies for which he paid premium for decades. Both insurance companied refused to pay out as policies prohibited criminal activity. The companies argued he son died after possession of illegal drugs which he possessed and then consumed.
The court upheld insurance companies refusal. The court decision will have wide spread consequences across Canada and may complicate things as multiple jurisdictions legalize small possession.
Toronto Landlord leased her condo to someone she had never met. Before she realized the tenant and her boy friend started leasing the condo on Airbnb without her knowledge and consent. The City of Toronto issued the boyfriend an Airbnb short term rental license to operate.
The owner discovered when condo neighbours complained. Now she has sued the City of Toronto and Airbnb for $1.6M for facilitating Airbnb business for a condo the client didn’t own or lease.
Average sale prices plummeted from five to 60 per cent in the first quarter of this year compared with last, according to the annual cottage trends report from Re/Max Canada. Kenora and Lake-of-the-Woods, Peterborough and the Kawarthas, and Haliburton saw the largest year-over-year drops.
Many GTA residents had borrowed from home equity lines to buy cottages which they rented on Airbnb as a business. With economic slowdown, cottage rental business has dried up fast with many cottage owners sitting with empty cottages.
Buyers for a townhouse gave a 2 month notice to tenants as they intended to use the property for their personal use. Buyers had made a firm offer with no financing condition. Buyers claimed their mortgage fell through and the deal was not closed. The Seller rented the property at a higher rent.
The Tenants sued the Buyers and the Tribunal awarded the tenants $27,000 in damages, rent equivalent to a 12 month period.
Real Estate market is known where Land lords have made fake sales and fake notices so as to evict tenants and rent it at higher rents. Dangerous game for buyers or fake buyers.
Decision-making responsibility was previously referred to as custody. Decision-making provides for how major decisions on behalf of a child will be made. This includes decisions relating to:
Decision-making can be arranged in a number of ways including where one parent makes all the decisions on behalf of the child, where this responsibility is shared between parents, and situations where each parent is responsible for a specific decision (i.e. one parent decides issues of religion and the other is responsible for medical care). There are many other arrangements that may be made depending on the best interest of the children involved.
Parenting-time was previously referred to as access. Parenting-time deals with issues involving where the child will live and how often the child will spend with either parent. Parenting-time arrangements for a child are decided based on what is in the best interest of the child.
When parents are unmarried or have separated and chosen not to get a divorce, the Children’s Law Reform Act will govern parenting-time and decision-making for children. There are a number of factors pursuant to section 24 (3) of the Children’s Law Reform Act that courts must consider when determining issues of decision-making and parenting time as follows:
If parents are married and are divorced or are trying to get divorced, the Divorce Act will govern parenting and decision-making responsibility. Based on section 16 (3) of the Divorce Act, the factors that a court considers when determining issues of decision-making and parenting-time include the following:
Although there are many factors for a court to consider when determining issues of decision-making and parenting-time, they will always be primarily concerned with the best interests of the children.
If you have questions about decision-making and parenting-time it is important that you speak to a lawyer who can provide you legal advice as to your particular situation.
