Does non-use, obstruction, and sign precluding access amount to clear evidence of abandonment?
Ontario, Canada
The following excerpt is from Relaxmuskoka v. 2052219 Ontario Inc., 2017 ONSC 5131 (CanLII):
Non-use, obstruction, rough terrain, impassibility and a sign precluding access do not amount to clear evidence of abandonment. (Jacuniak v. Tamburro, 2002 CarswellOnt. 1088 (ONSC), at para. 33)
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
Other Questions
What is the test for using the word "similar fact evidence" in a motion where the evidence is not the same fact evidence? (Ontario, Canada)
What impact would the inclusion of the evidence in the context of section 24(2) of the Charter under which the evidence is excluded? (Ontario, Canada)
Is there any case law in which the Court has rejected evidence tendered in affidavit form as other affidavit evidence? (Ontario, Canada)
Is supervised access a long-term solution to access problems? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the test for supervised access in a custody and access case? (Ontario, Canada)
In determining whether an employer has led sufficient evidence to give rise to a practical evidentiary burden, what is the test for this type of evidence? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the test for determining whether a historical access road is an access road? (Ontario, Canada)
How have the principals of the Rules of Civil Procedure apply to evidence that contradicts the evidence given by the complainants in their cross-examinations? (Ontario, Canada)
In what circumstances will a bank be able to clear a person's name clearing objective? (Ontario, Canada)
How has the court considered control and access to the area in question in determining whether the public had access and invited to use the area on the private property for parking purposes? (Ontario, Canada)
