The plaintiff, Amos Tayts, and the defendant Maxim Zavet, a lawyer, pursued a medical cannabis venture together.
Mr. Tayts contributed significant 'sweat equity' to the venture, which eventually became successful.
However, when founder's shares were allocated, Mr. Tayts was excluded and offered only a nominal amount.
Mr. Tayts sued for breach of contract, oppression, unjust enrichment, and breach of fiduciary duty.
The Superior Court of Justice found that while there was no binding contract for a specific percentage of shares, Mr. Tayts had a reasonable expectation of receiving founder's shares.
The court held that Mr. Zavet and the corporate defendants engaged in oppressive conduct by unfairly disregarding Mr. Tayts' interests.
The court also found Mr. Zavet and his holding company liable for unjust enrichment.
The court awarded Mr. Tayts $1,313,495.13 in damages.
The claim for breach of fiduciary duty was dismissed as the court found no solicitor-client relationship existed for the venture.
