Giouroukos v. Cadillac Fairview Corp.

1. The Court‑‑In reasons delivered by Robins J.A. (1983), 44 O.R. (2d) 166, 3 D.L.R. (4th) 595, 29 R.P.R. 224, the Ontario Court of Appeal exhaustively reviewed the law concerning an owner's inability to sue for recovery of lands while the lands were demised under successive leases. He concluded that the decision of the English Court of Appeal in Corpus Christi College v. Rogers (1879), 49 L.J. Ex. 4, ought to be followed in preference to the House of Lords' decision in Ecclesiastical Commissioners of England and Wales v. Rowe (1880), 5 App. Cas. 736. We are in complete agreement with the reasons of Robins J.A. on this issue, and, like him, find it unnecessary to address the question whether the appellant had otherwise met the requirements for extinguishing the respondents' title pursuant to ss. 4 and 15 of the Limitations Act, R.S.O. 1980, c. 240.

2. The appeal is accordingly dismissed with costs to the respondents in this Court and in the courts below.

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Solicitors for the respondents: Goodman & Carr, Toronto.