1. August 19, 2024 - ONSC 4564

   • Massimo Conti, the appellant, alleged that the respondents (Daytona Auto Centre Ltd. and the Duca family) promised to transfer a property to him as part of an employment agreement. He claimed that after leaving his job, the respondents tried to sell the property, leading him to file for a certificate of pending litigation (CPL) to prevent the sale.
   • The court vacated the CPL due to:
     • Non-disclosure of material facts by Conti's counsel.
     • Inaccuracies in the affidavit and evidence.
     • Improper service of notice for the initial CPL hearing.
   • Conti's appeal was dismissed, and the CPL was discharged?.

2. October 11, 2024 - ONSC 5677

   • The court addressed the cost submissions. The respondents (the Duca family) and the intervenor, Sergio Grillone, who had a financial interest in the case, were awarded modest costs.
   • Conti was ordered to pay:
     • $2,500 to the respondents (Duca).
     • $2,500 to Grillone.
   • The court rejected claims for higher costs, finding no egregious misconduct by Conti’s counsel but acknowledged the delay and inconvenience caused to the respondents?.

Final Outcome: Conti’s appeal was dismissed, the CPL was vacated, and he was ordered to pay a total of $5,000 in costs. The property could be sold, allowing Grillone to recover his fees from the sale.