2477791 Ontario Inc. v. Top Art Roofing Ltd., 2025 ONSC 1482 (CanLII) 

 

2477791 Ontario Inc. v. Top Art Roofing Ltd., 2025 ONSC 1482, was heard in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Divisional Court. The appellant, 2477791 Ontario Inc., sought to appeal an order from Deputy Judge Minns, who denied their request for an adjournment at the commencement of a Small Claims Court trial. The dispute arose from a roofing contract between the appellant and the respondent, Top Art Roofing Ltd., where the appellant stopped payment on the final cheque due to alleged deficiencies, leading the respondent to halt work and file a counterclaim for unpaid invoices. 

The appellant initially requested an adjournment before Justice O’Brien, citing a witness’s family emergency, but the request was denied due to insufficient explanation. At the trial’s commencement, the appellant renewed the request, which was again denied. The appellant then filed an appeal, arguing that the denial of the adjournment amounted to procedural unfairness. However, the Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, ruling that the appellant failed to provide the necessary transcripts and reasons from the lower court, making it impossible to assess the trial judge’s decision. The court also found that the appellant had ample time to order the transcripts but failed to do so, leading to wasted court resources. 

The ruling falls under civil law, specifically contract law and procedural fairness, governed by Ontario’s Rules of Civil Procedure, R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194. The decision reinforces the importance of timely compliance with procedural requirements in appeals and highlights the consequences of failing to perfect an appeal properly.