pedestrian, the jackassedness of the former has been proved, but,
at that point, it is only an allegation against the latter.”
In a footnote to his reasons Mr. Justice Quinn said, “I am prepared to certify
a class action for the return of all wedding gifts.”
On a more serious note, the judge made a minor variation to the separation
agreement. He chastised the wife for her conduct in alienating their
daughter from her father and as punishment ordered that she receive no
To deny a spouse spousal support on account of bad behaviour is a bold,
innovative step and one that would not likely survive appellate scrutiny,
but Mr. Justice Quinn’s shaming of the parties likely caused them to flee
into obscurity, hopefully with their heads hung down.
One last laugh, from the trial reasons in Pirbhai v. Singh4—Mr. Justice
Quinn again, at his best:
—“Singh, on the other hand, is a devious man and an unbelievable witness
who will do or say anything to advance his position. He was maddeningly
unwilling to respond to the simplest of questions and often
had to be asked the same question over and over (no doubt using the
time gained to visit his pantry of untruthful answers). He was evasive,
non-responsive and verbose in his testimony. Throughout the trial, I
patiently waited for a Phoenix-like moment that might serve to rehabilitate
his credibility: it never came. All in all, he was an exasperating witness
who told untruths too numerous to catalogue and insulting in their
—“Indeed, by the end of the trial, if Singh were to have testified that the
world was round, I immediately would have sought membership in the
Flat Earth Society.”
—“I feel somewhat responsible for this as I must have done or said something
during the trial that caused Singh to believe that I was dim-witted.”
Of course, not everyone appreciates Mr. Justice Quinn’s droll repartee.
But I say he has to have some fun … Imagine listening to long-winded
lawyers and lying witnesses all day!
522 V O L . 7 5 P A R T 4 J U L Y 2 0 1 7 THE ADVOCATE
1. 2014 ONSC 5831.
2. 2016 ONSC 4509. Quinn J.’s decision was
affirmed, though the costs order was set aside and
varied so as to be enforceable only against the corporate
3. 2010 ONSC 6568.
4. 2010 ONSC 2446.
t t t t t