David Gruber

In a CCAA proceeding involving a condominium project, the debtor sought to disclaim pre-sale agreements with unit purchasers.

The purchasers brought a motion for the production of an unredacted appraisal report referenced in the debtor's affidavit.

The court held that while the mandatory production requirement under Rule 30.04(2) is subject to discretion in CCAA proceedings, fairness and transparency required production of the unredacted report to the purchasers, subject to a non-disclosure agreement.

Cross-motions by a contingent creditor and real estate brokers for production of the reports were dismissed due to their lesser need and potential conflicts of interest.

The appellant appealed a motion judge's decision that its $4 million unliquidated damages claim for defective bottles did not qualify as a 'CCAA claim' under an April 3, 2002 Order.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding the motion judge's interpretation of his own order was reasonable and deserving of deference.

The Administration Fund was intended to protect suppliers who extended credit during the stay period, not to establish a preference for unliquidated damages claims.

The defendants brought a motion for leave to appeal a decision dismissing their motion for summary judgment.

The underlying action involved claims of conspiracy and unlawful interference against the defendants, who acted as opposing counsel in a prior oppression proceeding that settled.

The court granted leave to appeal under Rule 62.02(4)(ii), finding good reason to doubt the correctness of the motions judge's decision due to a failure to provide sufficient reasons addressing whether the action was frivolous and vexatious, and determining the issue was of sufficient public importance.