The plaintiff brought an action alleging negligence against accountants and a lawyer arising from tax planning involving a family trust created to facilitate the sale of shares in a technology company.
The defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing the claims were barred by limitation periods, unsupported by expert evidence, or defeated by illegality relating to the alleged backdating of the trust.
The court held that the record revealed numerous disputed factual issues, including the scope of the defendants’ retainers, the timing and legality of the trust’s creation, and the plaintiff’s knowledge of potential tax problems.
Applying the full appreciation test from Combined Air Mechanical Services Inc. v. Flesch, the court concluded that the evidentiary conflicts required the full forensic process of a trial.
Both summary judgment motions were dismissed with costs in the cause.
