Case information
Conduct a refined search of the Supreme Court of Canada database to obtain details on the status of a matter before the Court.
40010
Adriana Hornstein v. Anatoly Kats, et al.
(Ontario) (Civil) (By Leave)
Docket
Judgments on applications for leave to appeal are rendered by the Court, but are not necessarily unanimous.
| Date | Proceeding | Filed By (if applicable) |
|---|---|---|
| 2022-04-14 | Copy of formal judgment sent to Registrar of the Court of Appeal and all parties | |
| 2022-04-14 | Judgment on leave sent to the parties | |
| 2022-04-14 | Close file on Leave | |
| 2022-04-14 |
Judgment of the Court on the application for leave to appeal, The motion for an extension of time to serve and file the response to the application for leave to appeal is granted. The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal for Ontario, Number C68450, 2021 ONCA 293, dated May 6, 2021, is dismissed with costs. Dismissed, with costs |
|
| 2022-04-14 |
Decision on motion to extend time, See decision on application. Granted |
|
| 2022-03-14 | All materials on application for leave submitted to the Judges, for consideration by the Court | |
| 2022-03-14 | Submission of motion to extend time, for consideration by the Court | |
| 2022-02-16 | Motion to extend time, (Book Form), received: email communications in support of the motion (received 2022-02-16), Completed on: 2022-03-11, (Printed version due on 2022-02-23) | Rachel Higgins |
| 2022-02-16 | Certificate (on limitations to public access), (Letter Form), require: amended 23A (rec'd 2022-03-11), (Printed version due on 2022-02-23) | Anatoly Kats |
| 2022-02-16 | Certificate (on limitations to public access), (Letter Form), (Printed version due on 2022-02-23) | Rachel Higgins |
| 2022-02-07 |
Respondent's response on the application for leave to appeal, (Book Form), Require: - Proof of service (rec'd 2022-02-16) - Public access to information Form (rec'd 2022-02-16) - Motion for extension of time (rec'd 2022-02-16), Completed on: 2022-03-11 |
Rachel Higgins |
| 2022-02-02 |
Respondent's response on the application for leave to appeal, (Book Form), require: -23A (rec'd 2022-02-16) -amended 23A (rec'd 2022-03-11), Completed on: 2022-03-15 |
Anatoly Kats |
| 2022-01-28 | Supplemental document, Electronic copy Annex to application | Adriana Hornstein |
| 2022-01-28 | Correspondence received from, Court of Appeal Order Form | Adriana Hornstein |
| 2022-01-28 | Certificate (on limitations to public access), Electronic copy Public Access to information Form | Adriana Hornstein |
| 2021-12-30 | Letter advising parties of an incomplete application for leave to appeal, FILE OPENED 2021-12-30 | |
| 2021-08-05 |
Application for leave to appeal, (Book Form), Received: -Final Court of Appeal Order (rec'd confirmation from applicant that no CA Order exists in this matter 2022-03-29) -Final Trial Court Order, dated 2020-05-21 (rec'd 2022-03-17) -CA Judgment (rec'd 2022-03-17) -Proof of service (rec'd 2022-01-28) -Public Access to Information Form (rec'd 2022-01-28) -Complete electronic copy of the application for leave to appeal (rec'd 2022-01-28, paper copy scanned 2022-02-24), Completed on: 2022-03-29, (Printed version filed on 2022-02-24) |
Adriana Hornstein |
Parties
Please note that in the case of closed files, the “Status” column reflects the status of the parties at the time of the proceedings. For more information about the proceedings and about the dates when the file was open, please consult the docket of the case in question.
Main parties
| Name | Role | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Hornstein, Adriana | Applicant | Active |
v.
| Name | Role | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Kats, Anatoly | Respondent | Active |
| Higgins, Rachel | Respondent | Active |
Counsel
Party: Hornstein, Adriana
This party is not represented by counsel.
Party: Kats, Anatoly
Counsel
123 John Street
Toronto, Ontario
M5V 2E2
Telephone: (416) 593-7107
Email: mross@rossnasseri.com
Party: Higgins, Rachel
This party is not represented by counsel.
Summary
Keywords
Civil procedure — Appeals — Costs — Property — Real property — Alleged partnership for purchase of residential property — Lower courts finding applicant has no entitlement to division of subject property and has no interest in property — Agreement of Purchase and Sale between respondents found to be valid — Whether lower courts erred in their reasoning and decision — Whether application for leave to appeal raises issues of national and public importance.
Summary
Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.
This case arises out of an alleged partnership for the purchase of a residential property. The applicant brought actions against the respondents claiming a beneficial interest in the property and a declaration that the Agreement of Purchase and Sale between the respondents be null and void and of no force or effect. Both respondents brought counterclaims for a declaration that the applicant had no legal title to the property and a claim for punitive damages.
The trial judge found that, on an objective view, the applicant’s actions were not consistent with a partnership and that no partnership was created. The trial judge also found that she had not contributed any monies to the purchase or maintenance of the property and had no beneficial interest in the property she alleged was owned by the partnership. The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge’s findings were entitled to deference. The appeal against the respondent Mr. Kats was dismissed.
The trial judge found that the respondent, Ms. Higgins had neither a claim for slander of title nor a claim for damages for breach of s. 132 of the Land Titles Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. L.5. Nevertheless, she ordered the applicant to pay Ms. Higgins punitive damages in the amount of $35,000, citing the egregious, unreasonable, and malicious nature of the applicant’s actions. The Court of Appeal found that the award of punitive damages must be set aside and the appeal was allowed only to that extent.
Lower court rulings
Ontario Superior Court of Justice
2020 ONSC 870, CV-09-394447
The Agreement of Purchase and Sale and the amendment to the APS for Alexis property are valid and the transaction is to proceed as agreed between Mr. Kats and Ms. Higgins.
The indeterminate notice registered on Alexis property on December 19, 2012 is improperly registered and is to be immediately removed such that the transaction can proceed.
Ms. Hornstein has no entitlement to a division of the subject property, has no interest in the property, and has no interest in any potential increase in value from 2011, when she improperly registered two notices on title, such that the sale of the Alexis property could not proceed, to this day.
All notices currently on title registered by Ms. Hornstein regarding Alexis property are to be deleted immediately by the Land Registrar.
Mr. Kats is entitled to the outstanding balance on the loan that he advanced to Ms. Hornstein with respect to another property, the Waterloo property, in the amount of $12,000, payable forthwith, less $1,400, the amount Ms. Hornstein paid Mr. Kats at one point.
Ms. Higgins is entitled to punitive damages in the amount of $35,000, payable by Ms. Hornstein.
Ontario Superior Court of Justice
2020 ONSC 5664
Costs awarded on substantial indemnity basis to Mr. Kats and Ms. Higgins.
Court of Appeal for Ontario
2021 ONCA 293, C68450
Appeal dismissed as against Mr. Kats. Appeal allowed only to the extent that the award of punitive damages payable to Ms. Higgins is set aside.
Memorandums of argument on application for leave to appeal
The memorandums of argument on an application for leave to appeal will be posted here 30 days after leave to appeal has been granted unless they contain personal information, information that is subject to a publication ban, or any other information that is not part of the public record. You may also obtain copies of the memorandum by filing out the Request for Court records form or by contacting the Court’s Records Centre either by email at records-dossiers@scc-csc.ca or by telephone at 613‑996‑7933 or at 1‑888‑551‑1185.
If you have questions about a memorandum of argument or want to use a memorandum of argument, please contact the author of the memorandum of argument directly. Their name appears at the end of the memorandum of argument. The contact information for counsel is found in the “Counsel” tab of this page.
Downloadable PDFs
Not available
Related links
Factums on appeal
The factums of the appellant, the respondent and the intervener will be posted here at least 2 weeks before the hearing unless they contain personal information, information that is subject to a publication ban, or any other information that is not part of the public record. You may also obtain copies of factums by filling out the Request for Court records form or by contacting the Court’s Records Centre either by email at records-dossiers@scc-csc.ca or by telephone at 613‑996‑7933 or at 1‑888‑551‑1185.
If you have questions about a factum or want permission to use a factum, please contact the author of the factum directly. Their contact information appears on the first page of each factum.
Downloadable PDFs
Not available