Article content continued

The tension has become so bad that, according to an affidavit by Mr. Taerk, Ms. Morland-Jones shouts profanity at him whenever he walks by, so he has taken to always carrying a voice recorder, held at the ready in his right hand.

“The controversy has even extended to other lucky residents,” the judge wrote. “The [Morland-Joneses] summoned… no less than four of their neighbours to testify on the pending motion, no doubt endearing themselves to all of them. One witness, a lawyer, was asked to confirm that he had warned the [Morland-Joneses] about the [Taerks] when they first moved into the neighbourhood; he responded that [he] can recall saying no such thing. Another witness, a professor, was asked to confirm that she sold her house for below market value just to get away from the Defendants; she said she did not.”

The “piece de resistance,” as Mr. Justice Morgan observed, was the Morland-Joneses’ claim that Ms. Taerk sometimes stands in her driveway and looks at their house for several seconds, a claim backed by video.

“There is no denying that Ms. Taerk is guilty as charged. The camera doesn’t lie,” the judge wrote.

He decided that this accusation, like the others, does not belong in court.

“There is no claim for pooping and scooping into the neighbour’s garbage can, and there is no claim for letting Rover water the neighbour’s hedge,” he wrote.

There is no serious issue to be tried, he found, and each side must bear their own substantial legal costs.

National Post