3 total
The court dismissed the former CEO's application for damages and relief from forfeiture regarding expired stock options due to his breach of a non-competition agreement.
The applicant, a former CEO of Aphria Inc., sought damages for the company's refusal to honor his stock options and, in the alternative, relief from forfeiture.
The court found that the stock options had expired according to the terms of the Aphria Incentive Stock Option Plan, which was incorporated by reference into the applicant's agreements.
Furthermore, the applicant was found to have breached a non-competition agreement by leasing land to a medical marijuana producer during the restricted term.
Consequently, the court dismissed the application, denying both the claim for damages and the request for equitable relief from forfeiture due to the applicant's breach of the non-competition agreement.
The court set aside the corollary relief of a default divorce order due to the respondent's mental incapacity.
The respondent, represented by the Public Guardian and Trustee (PGT), brought a motion to set aside the corollary relief of a default divorce order obtained by the applicant.
The PGT argued that the respondent, who has a history of mental illness, lacked the capacity to instruct counsel or understand the implications of not responding to the original application.
The court considered the respondent's fluctuating mental health, the applicant's knowledge of her condition, and the need for procedural and substantive fairness under the Family Law Rules.
The court granted the motion to set aside the corollary relief, ordered the production of counselling records to determine the correct valuation date, but dismissed requests for a non-depletion order and an immediate increase in spousal support.
In an uncontested family trial, the court imputed a $500,000 income to the non-disclosing respondent, awarding sole custody, supervised access, and full costs to the applicant.
The applicant, Lisa Rezai, proceeded with an uncontested trial against the respondent, Glen Gibbons, who failed to appear or provide adequate disclosure throughout the lengthy litigation.
The court granted sole custody and decision-making authority for the child to the applicant, ordered supervised access for the respondent due to his history of alcoholism, anger, and threatening behavior, and imputed an income of $500,000 per annum to the respondent for child and spousal support purposes.
The court also ordered significant retroactive support and section 7 expenses, an equalization payment from the matrimonial home proceeds, and full legal costs to the applicant due to the respondent's bad faith and uncooperative conduct.
The applicant's claim for a constructive trust was dismissed, but an equalization payment was awarded.
