The next case raised by the moving parties is Hare v. Ontario (Registrar of Real Estate Brokers), [1948] O.J. No. 1256 (Div. Ct.). Again, briefly, this decision dealt with the situation where a notice of appeal was not served on a party directly but on his lawyer. The court held that Otaco was still good law in Ontario and that service on a party’s lawyer was not proper service under the then rules of practice. I do not see how Hare is of any assistance in dealing with the issues in this matter.
"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.