3 total
Motion to set aside Mareva injunction dismissed, but varied for living/legal expenses and transcripts sealed.
The Canadian respondents brought a motion to set aside an ex parte Mareva injunction that froze their assets worldwide.
They argued the injunction should be set aside due to material non-disclosure by the applicants and insufficient evidence of their involvement in the alleged $71.7 million fraud or risk of dissipation.
The court dismissed the motion to set aside, finding no material non-disclosure and sufficient evidence of knowing receipt of misappropriated funds and risk of dissipation.
However, the court varied the order to release funds for the respondents' living and legal expenses.
The court also granted a sealing order over the transcripts of the respondents' compelled examinations to protect their rights against self-incrimination in light of a criminal investigation in Iran.
The respondents' request for security for the applicants' undertaking as to damages was denied.
The court ordered the defendants to pay outstanding costs and post security for costs to avoid dismissal of their damages crossclaim.
The Bernstein Defendants brought a motion seeking to dismiss the crossclaim of Norma Walton and Ronauld Walton (the "Waltons") for damages due to their failure to pay a $32,000 costs award.
Alternatively, they sought to stay the crossclaim until costs were paid and the Waltons posted $200,000 security for costs.
The court ordered the Waltons to pay the outstanding $32,000 costs plus an additional $12,000 for the current motion within 60 days, failing which their crossclaim for damages would be dismissed.
If these costs were paid, the Waltons were then required to post $200,000 security for costs for their damages crossclaim within another 60 days, failing which it would also be dismissed.
The Waltons' claims for contribution and indemnity were permitted to proceed irrespective of these conditions.
TCM practitioner found guilty of professional misconduct for false advertising, prohibited titles, and unsupported treatment claims.
The College of Traditional Chinese Medicine Practitioners and Acupuncturists of Ontario brought allegations of professional misconduct against the member, a registered TCM practitioner.
The allegations centered on the member's use of prohibited titles such as 'Master' and 'Grandmaster', claims of unauthorized specialization in Qigong for sexual dysfunction, and false or misleading advertising including the use of patient testimonials.
The member also claimed his Qigong treatments and a secret liquid mixed with patient urine could cure kidney and liver dysfunctions.
The Discipline Committee found that the member's Qigong practice fell within the College's jurisdiction and that he failed to adhere to the standards of practice.
All allegations of professional misconduct were proven.
