2 total
The court varied its unentered reasons for judgment to correct a technical error but declined to alter substantive findings or add an unpleaded claim for knowing receipt.
The applicant sought to vary a previous judgment regarding contract beneficiaries and liability for knowing receipt.
The court declined to change the finding on beneficiaries (para 19) as it was an intentional commercial interpretation.
The court did remove an erroneous finding of breach of contract against CIBC Mellon, but declined to substitute it with a finding of knowing receipt, as that relief was not sought in the initial application.
The court granted the applicant's request to introduce evidence of damages related to data sharing by all custodial entities of Mellon Financial Corporation at the time of the agreement, despite the previous finding that those entities were entitled to receive the data.
Respondents found liable for breaching data sharing agreements; damages directed to a trial.
The applicant claimed damages of over $889 million for breach of two Data Services Agreements, alleging the respondents improperly shared market pricing data within their corporate group.
The respondents argued the agreements allowed sharing across their 'line of business' or brand.
The court found the respondents breached the agreements, as the contracts, factual matrix, and parties' conduct indicated the data was restricted to the named entities.
Defences of waiver, estoppel, and limitation periods were dismissed.
However, the court found the paper record insufficient to assess damages and directed the issue of damages to a trial.
