Hari Nesathurai

The defendants moved to set aside ex parte orders that granted the plaintiffs certificates of pending litigation against certain properties and appointed a monitor over two furniture store franchises.

The dispute arose from an intra-family sale of the franchises, where the plaintiffs alleged the defendants made misrepresentations about the transaction's proceeds and the inclusion of additional properties.

The defendants argued the ex parte orders should be set aside for failure to make full and fair disclosure.

The court dismissed the motion, finding no material non-disclosure, and maintained the certificates of pending litigation and the monitor, concluding that a triable issue remained and the balance of convenience favoured the plaintiffs.

The plaintiff brought a motion to extend a court-ordered deadline for serving an amended statement of claim to add a winter maintenance contractor as a defendant.

The presumptive limitation period had expired, but a previous order allowed the addition based on discoverability, setting a service deadline of March 31, 2016.

The plaintiff failed to meet this deadline and delayed over two years before bringing this motion.

The court dismissed the motion, finding the plaintiff failed to adequately explain the delay, show inadvertence, or prove that the proposed defendant would not suffer prejudice.

The bankrupt appealed a Master's order granting a conditional discharge that required him to pay $284,346 in accumulated surplus income and an additional $5,000 per month for six years.

The bankrupt argued the Master erred by treating the additional payments as a recalculation of surplus income under section 68 of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act.

The Superior Court of Justice dismissed the appeal, finding that the Master properly imposed the additional payments as a condition of discharge under section 172, not as a recalculation of surplus income.

The court held the condition was reasonable given the bankrupt's substantial ongoing disability income, his failure to pay surplus income during the bankruptcy, and his lack of remorse for misappropriating $5 million from clients.