The court also told a controversial group to pay $12,000 in court costs
The United People of Canada (TUPC), which wanted to take back control of St. Brigid’s Church in Lowertown, lost its case in court.
The judges also said that the group has to pay $12,000 to cover the cost of the appeal.
In a five-page decision released on Monday, a panel of the divisional court wrote that TUPC’s arguments had “a number of problems,” including that it “misread” the Commercial Tenancies Act.
The panel also said that TUPC’s claim that the landlords’ notice of termination was “deficient” didn’t take into account the fact that the landlords had given the group two notices of default.
Patrick McDonald and three other partners own the property near the ByWard Market. According to court documents, McDonald said that a deal for TUPC to buy the building fell through because TUPC did not make deposits totaling $100,000.
His sworn affidavit said that the group’s failure to make those payments, along with the fact that they owed $10,000 in rent and had not shown proof of $5 million in liability insurance, gave the landlord the right to end the lease.
The owners of the heritage property, which has ties to the Freedom Convoy, asked Superior Court Justice Sally Gomery for permission to kick out the group in September. The divisional court agreed.
Gomery also told the controversial group that they had to pay the owners of the land $58,000 in costs within 30 days.
The judges who looked over her decision said TUPC didn’t show she’d made a “palpable and overriding error.”
Lawyer says TUPC owes $65
CBC got a copy of the decision from the lawyer for the landlords, Gordon Douglas.
He said that as of Monday afternoon, he had not heard from TUPC. He also said that so far, his clients have only been able to get back $5,000.
With the added costs awarded for the failed appeal, the group now owes the landlords $65,000, according to the lawyer.
When CBC called on Monday afternoon, one of TUPC’s directors, William Komer, said that the group had not seen a copy of the court’s decision.
Komer also said that if their appeal was turned down, it would be “completely shocking” and against “case law precedent.”
Douglas said he told the building’s owners about the decision, and one of them said it was the “best news” she’d heard in a while.
“The owners of the property will be thinking about how best to use it in the future,” he said. “This could be as owners or as people who are interested in finding a new owner for the property.”