Elee Scarlett

The applicant sought to assess the legal accounts of her former lawyers more than two years after the retainer ended and the accounts were paid.

The respondent lawyers brought a motion to strike the assessment application as statute-barred under the Solicitors Act.

The court granted the motion to strike, finding no special circumstances to justify the delay and noting prejudice to the respondents.

However, the court granted the applicant's cross-motion, ordering the respondents to return the remaining balance of funds held in trust.

The applicants sought enforcement of a final arbitration award ordering the respondents to purchase the applicants’ minority shareholding in hotel development corporations for $1.15 million after findings of oppressive conduct.

The respondents requested additional time to arrange financing before enforcement.

The court exercised its authority under the Arbitration Act to enforce the award but stayed enforcement for approximately six weeks to permit completion of financing for the buy‑out.

Requests concerning termination of the minority shareholder’s board veto rights and the status of a mortgage held by the minority shareholder were declined.

Operational arrangements ordered in prior interlocutory endorsements were continued pending the buy‑out deadline.

The appellant appealed a decision upholding a non-competition covenant.

The appellant argued the covenant was too broad in subject matter, duration, and geographic reach, and contrary to public policy.

The majority of the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding the application judge correctly applied the law and reasonably concluded the covenant was enforceable between knowledgeable commercial parties of equal bargaining power.

A dissenting judge would have allowed the appeal, finding the covenant's geographic reach and duration excessive and vague.