KPA Lawyers – October 17, 2016
The Divisional Court has upheld a decision by a Toronto Small Claims Court Judge, who ordered Abdulkadir Elmi Mohamed (also known as Abdul Mohamed), to pay $19,656 plus costs to Amal Ahmed.
The plaintiff, Amal Ahmed (â€œPlaintiffâ€) is the daughter of the appellant Amina Ibrahim (â€œAminaâ€). The appellant, named as Mohamed Abdulkadir (â€œMohamedâ€) in the Court proceedings, is Aminaâ€™s friend.
At the time in question, the Plaintiff had been living with her mother for 27 years. They lived in Toronto Community Housing. The Plaintiff was studying to become a nurse. The Plaintiff had a young daughter of her own and her husband lived and worked in the United States.
Amina supported herself with social assistance. She did not work. On November 29, 2013, the Plaintiff transferred $46,991.03 from her RBC bank account to Mohamedâ€™s RBC bank account.
The total amount consisted of money belonging to the Plaintiff and money belonging to her mother Amina.
Amina had received money from the settlement of a motor vehicle accident claim and this amount was deposited in the Plaintiffâ€™s RBC bank account. The judge accepted the Plaintiffâ€™s evidence that $19,656.00 in the Plaintiffâ€™s bank account belonged to the Plaintiff. The evidence was that the Plaintiff had money in her account from her student loans. The rest of the money in the Plaintiffâ€™s bank account belonged to Amina.
At trial, the Plaintiff testified that she made numerous requests for her money to be returned to her, which went ignored by the Defendants, Amina Ibrahim and Abdul Mohamed.
Justice Horkins of the Divisional Court stated, “The Deputy Judge made clear findings of fact that attract deference. As a trial judge, he had the opportunity to assess the credibility of the parties. It is clear that he did not accept the version of events that Amina and Mohamed presented: specifically, that all of the money belonged to Amina and that it was paid out of Mohamedâ€™s bank account for the benefit of the Plaintiff … the Deputy Judge found at para. 63 that the money was transferred to Mohamed at the Plaintiffâ€™s request. Part of this money belonged to her and there was no evidence that it was ever returned to her.”
Mohamed later filed a motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal, which was dismissed with costs payable to Amal Ahmed. Mohamed has since filed a Consumer Proposal pursuant to the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act.