Ali Mian

The bankrupt, a lawyer, made an assignment in bankruptcy but concealed it for years while an estate trustee sued him for breach of fiduciary duty and misappropriation, eventually obtaining a default judgment.

The bankrupt later sought to rely on the automatic stay of proceedings under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act to avoid the judgment and subsequent costs orders.

The court dismissed the bankrupt's motion and granted the estate trustee's motion, finding that the claim was too remote and speculative to be a provable claim in bankruptcy.

Alternatively, the court held the debt would survive bankruptcy under s. 178 due to the bankrupt's misappropriation while acting in a fiduciary capacity, and that it would be equitable to lift the stay under s. 69.4 given the bankrupt's egregious conduct.

An estates dispute arose over ownership of a residential property transferred by elderly parents to a daughter as a joint tenant without consideration.

The applicants alleged the transfer was invalid due to non est factum, undue influence, or a resulting trust, and alternatively argued that a later transfer severed the joint tenancy.

The court found the parents understood the nature and consequences of the transaction and intended to make a complete inter vivos gift, thereby rebutting the presumption of resulting trust under Pecore.

The court also held the later transfer into the daughter’s sole legal title accompanied by a declaration of trust did not sever the joint tenancy.

The property was ordered sold with net proceeds divided equally between the surviving parent and the daughter, and the daughter’s claim for reimbursement for renovations was dismissed for lack of proof.

The plaintiff, a senior vice president at a mezzanine financing company, was terminated without cause after nearly four years of employment.

He brought an action for wrongful dismissal, seeking damages in lieu of notice, including lost bonus income and stock options.

The court dismissed the claim for stock options as they were not exercisable at the date of termination, and rejected the employer's argument that the plaintiff failed to mitigate his damages.

The court calculated the plaintiff's lost bonus income using a historical average and, applying the Bardal factors, awarded a 12-month notice period, resulting in a net damages award of $272,047.86.