Dale Denis

The appellant entered into an Agreement of Purchase and Sale with a court-appointed receiver to purchase real estate.

The receiver brought a motion for approval and vesting.

However, late-breaking offers emerged, including one 37% higher than the appellant's offer.

The motion judge declined to approve the sale and instead ordered a six-day extension of the bidding process.

The appellant appealed, arguing the motion judge misapplied the principles from Royal Bank of Canada v. Soundair Corp. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding the motion judge properly exercised discretion in reopening the auction process given the magnitude of the late offer and the receiver's alternative recommendation.

The plaintiff obtained an ex parte Mareva injunction against multiple defendants, including Nova Diamonds Inc. and Toronto Reserve Gold Inc., alleging they received proceeds from a fraudulent mortgage.

The moving defendants sought to set aside the injunction, arguing the plaintiff failed to make full and frank disclosure on the ex parte motion.

The court found that the plaintiff failed to disclose that it had not conducted a tracing analysis to confirm the funds received by the moving defendants were actually the fraudulent proceeds, and that it had no evidence of a risk of dissipation.

The court set aside the Mareva injunction and subsequent non-dissipation orders against the moving defendants due to the plaintiff's material non-disclosure.