Decisions of the Court of Appeal

Decision Information

Decision Content

COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO

CITATION: Anani v. Sharawy, 2024 ONCA 686

DATE: 20240913

DOCKET: M55014 (COA-24-CV-0084)

Lauwers, Paciocco and Harvison Young JJ.A.

BETWEEN

Ziad Anani

Applicant (Appellant)

and

Faraj Sharawy[1]

Respondent (Respondent)

Ziad Anani, acting in person

Heard: In Writing

REASONS FOR DECISION

 

 


[1]          Zaid Anani seeks to appeal a summary judgment order made against him on January 15, 2024. This appeal is not yet perfected. He has yet to file an issued and entered order from that decision.

[2]          On April 2, 2024, Benotto J.A. denied his motion in writing to dispense with the filing of an issued and entered order. Mr. Anani did not have the required order because he did not follow the directions that the Registrar of the Superior Court communicated to him. Instead, he “insisted that the order be signed even though he did not have the order approved as to form and content”. In dismissing the motion, she found “[t]he applicant is required to follow the rules. He cannot fail to do so and then come to this court seeking an order for non-compliance.”

[3]          In the motion in writing that is before us, Mr. Anani seeks to have the order made by Benotto J.A. “set aside or varied” by this panel. In order for a panel to set aside or vary the order of a judge who hears and determines a motion, it must be found that the motion judge “failed to identify the applicable principles, erred in principle, or reached an unreasonable result”: Hillmount Capital Inc. v. Pizale, 2021 ONCA 364, 462 D.L.R. (4th) 228, at para. 18. Mr. Anani has not identified any errors or principle made by the motion judge, and her decision is entirely reasonable. She was entitled to make the order she did, for the reasons she gave. Mr. Anani asserts that the motion judge relied on disputed and unproven claims and ignored the undisputed evidence such as “transcripts” and other evidence unchallenged by the Respondent, but he provides no particulars for these allegations and the materials he has filed, do not support these claims.

[4]          The request for a panel review is dismissed. The respondent did not file materials on this motion so no order of costs will be made.

“P. Lauwers J.A.”

“David M. Paciocco J.A.”

“A. Harvison Young J.A.”



[1] The responding party did not participate in this motion.

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.