Find below recently published Ottawa decisions, available for free through CanLII.org.
Family Matters
A.B. v. C.D. (2026 ONSC 2583)
In a family law dispute, the Court dismissed a father’s motion for DNA paternity testing, finding it lacked evidentiary support and served no useful purpose. The Court emphasized the children’s best interests, rejecting the father’s motives as self-serving and potentially harmful to the children’s emotional well-being.
Associate Justice I. Kamal
Civil Matters
Wang et al. v. Qi et al. (2026 ONSC 2594)
The Court approved settlements for an injured passenger and a minor following a bus collision, including fund management plans and solicitor-client fees. The dismissal of claims against non-paying defendants was also granted, concluding the multi-party litigation.
Justice S. Corthorn
ApSimon v. Hategan (2026 ONSC 2582)
In a costs endorsement, the Court ordered the defendant to pay $27,263 on a partial indemnity scale, citing over-litigation of an anti-SLAPP motion, potential malice, and prejudice to the plaintiff in a Simplified Procedure action. The statutory presumption against costs was deemed inapplicable due to the circumstances.
Justice S. Corthorn
El Batnigi v. Attorney General of Canada (2026 ONSC 2513)
The Court struck a claim seeking declarations that Canada failed to prevent genocide in Gaza, ruling the issues non-justiciable as they involve foreign policy and Crown prerogative. The Court also found no violations of Charter rights due to insufficient causal links and lack of state-caused deprivation.
Justice C. Hackland
Wilson v. Ottawa Police Service et al. (2026 ONSC 2410)
A self-represented plaintiff’s defamation and conspiracy claims were dismissed under Rule 2.1 as frivolous, vexatious, and abusive. The Court found the claims lacked merit, targeted privileged legal submissions, and exhibited hallmarks of vexatious litigation, warranting summary dismissal
Justice P. Roger
Li v. Icentury Immigration Inc. et al (2026 ONSC 2615)
The Court denied a motion for security for costs, finding it unjust given the Defendants’ possession of disputed funds sufficient to cover potential costs and their failure to prove lost opportunity costs as self-represented litigants. Costs of $4,500 were awarded to the Plaintiff.
Associate Justice M. Fortier
Myles v. The Sport Dispute Resolution Centre of Canada (2026 ONSC 1729)
The Court upheld an arbitrator’s decision that a sports code of conduct could apply retroactively to historical misconduct, emphasizing its purpose to protect the public and ensure safe sport environments, rather than to punish past behavior. The appeal was dismissed, and the matter was remitted for further arbitration.
Justice C. Hackland