I. Katchin

A case conference was held to address trial management issues for an upcoming virtual trial concerning a development project and a claim of misfeasance of public office.

The court issued directions regarding the narrowing of issues, the exchange of witness lists and will-say statements, the filing of a joint document brief, and the scheduling of witnesses.

The applicant sought declarations that a writ of execution obtained by the respondents did not attach to his real property and requested removal of execution restrictions from title.

The respondents brought a responding application asserting that the writs bound the applicant as the true judgment debtor under a foreign judgment enforcement action.

The court found the applicant had never been properly served with the statement of claim underlying the default judgment relied upon by the respondents.

Without valid service, the judgment was a nullity and could not support the writ of execution against the applicant’s land.

The court granted the applicant’s relief and dismissed the respondents’ application.

Creditors brought a motion under s. 69.4 of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act seeking a declaration that the statutory stay of proceedings arising from a proposal no longer applied to their civil action against the debtor.

The underlying action alleged fraud, conspiracy, deceit, and conversion involving the misappropriation of significant funds.

The court held that the creditors would likely be materially prejudiced by continuation of the stay and that equitable grounds justified lifting it, particularly where the alleged debt would likely survive a bankruptcy discharge and the debtor appeared to be delaying the proceedings.

The court also confirmed a previously granted Mareva injunction on a nunc pro tunc basis to preserve assets.

Costs were awarded to the moving parties on a partial‑indemnity basis.