Court of Appeal

Decision Information

Decision Content

NOVA SCOTIA COURT OF APPEAL

Citation: Doncaster v. Field, 2012 NSCA 116   

 

Date: 20121121

Docket: CA 393423

Registry: Halifax

 

Between:

 

Ralph Ivan Doncaster

 

Appellant

 

v.

 

Jennifer Lynn Field

 

Respondent

 

Judges:                          Saunders, Oland and Beveridge, JJ.A.

 

Appeal Heard:              November 21, 2012, in Halifax, Nova Scotia

 

Written Judgment:       November 22, 2012

 

Held:                             Leave to appeal denied per oral reasons for judgment of the Court

 

Counsel:                        Appellant not appearing

                                      Kenzie MacKinnon, for the respondent

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

By the Court: (Orally)

[1]             Thank you Mr. MacKinnon for your submissions this afternoon. 

[2]             The record discloses that the appellant was present in court on June 28, 2012, when this case was set down for appeal, to be heard at two o’clock this afternoon.

[3]             The record also reflects the several notifications and reminders communicated to the appellant that his factum was due August 10, 2012.

[4]             Mr. Doncaster never applied for an extension, although the method of doing so was explained to him by the Registrar.

[5]             The appellant did not file a factum on the due date, or at all.

[6]             The appellant is not present at today’s hearing.

[7]             We are unanimously of the view that because the appellant has failed to perfect his appeal, leave to appeal ought to be denied.

[8]             Costs of $1,500.00 inclusive of disbursements are ordered payable to the respondent, forthwith.

 

                                                                   Saunders, J.A.

 

                                                                   Oland, J.A.

 

                                                                   Beveridge, J.A.
                                                                  

 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.