Who is Elliot S. Birnboim?

Elliot S. Birnboim is an Ontario lawyer with 3 court cases on record from 2003 to 2011.

What courts has Elliot S. Birnboim appeared in?

Elliot S. Birnboim has appeared in Court of Appeal.

How many cases has Elliot S. Birnboim handled?

Elliot S. Birnboim has 3 cases on record from 2003 to 2011.

What judges has Elliot S. Birnboim appeared before?

Elliot S. Birnboim has most frequently appeared before Justice Cronk, Justice O’Connor, Justice Rouleau.

Elliot S. Birnboim

3 total

Loat v. Howarth, 2011 ONCA 509

The appellant, a former executive and minority shareholder, sued the respondents in Ontario for wrongful dismissal, unpaid wages, and oppression.

The motions judge denied the appellant's motion for partial summary judgment and granted the respondents' motion to stay the action based on an exclusive forum selection clause in a Shareholders' Agreement favouring England.

On appeal, the Court of Appeal upheld the denial of summary judgment but set aside the stay.

The Court found that the motions judge erred by ignoring a non-exclusive Ontario forum selection clause in the appellant's Service Agreement and by failing to consider that the respondents had attorned to Ontario's jurisdiction by defending the action on the merits and counterclaiming before invoking the English forum selection clause.

ONCAJul 12, 2011

Applicant Counsel

First Choice Petroleum Inc. v. 1186728 Ontario Ltd., 2003 ONCA 57427

The appellants appealed the judgment of the Superior Court of Justice.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that the trial judge's findings of fact were open to him on the evidence and were fatal to the issues raised.

The court also held that the issue of interest was a question of contract and was properly pleaded.

The appeal was dismissed with costs fixed at $5,000.

ONCASep 3, 2003

Applicant Counsel

Shelanu Inc. v. Print Three Franchising Corporation, 2003 ONCA 52151

The franchisor, Print Three, appealed a trial judgment finding it liable for fundamental breach of a franchise agreement and breach of a duty of good faith.

The franchisee, Shelanu, had entered into a subsequent oral agreement regarding royalty rebates, which Print Three later refused to honour.

The Court of Appeal upheld the enforceability of the oral agreement despite an entire agreement clause, finding the parties had amended their written agreement by conduct.

The Court also affirmed that a duty of good faith exists in franchisor-franchisee relationships.

However, the Court found the trial judge erred in concluding that Print Three's establishment of a new franchise concept breached this duty, and further erred in finding a fundamental breach that excused Shelanu from future performance.

The appeal and cross-appeal were allowed, and damages on the franchisor's counterclaim were reassessed.

ONCAMay 20, 2003