Jamie Sanderson

Three related applications were brought concerning shareholder disputes in three closely held corporations operating as insurance brokerages and an investment holding company.

The applicants sought declarations of oppression and various remedial orders, including share buyouts and winding up.

The court dismissed all claims of oppression, finding no conduct that violated reasonable expectations.

However, the court found that the shareholders of two of the operating companies were hopelessly deadlocked and unable to work together.

Consequently, the court ordered the winding up of those two companies under the just and equitable ground of the Business Corporations Act, while dismissing the request to wind up the investment holding company.

The plaintiffs brought a motion for summary judgment against the defendant for breach of an agreement of purchase and sale of a residential property.

The defendant failed to close the transaction after multiple extensions and amendments.

The plaintiffs subsequently resold the property at a lower price and sought damages for the difference, carrying costs, and forfeiture of deposits.

The court granted summary judgment, finding no genuine issue for trial regarding the defendant's breach, the plaintiffs' reasonable mitigation efforts, and the calculation of damages.

The plaintiffs were awarded $806,380.59, with the $150,000 in forfeited deposits credited towards the judgment.

The defendants abandoned a motion to introduce fresh evidence and set aside the trial judgment based on allegations of fraud.

The plaintiff sought costs on a substantial indemnity scale for the abandoned motion.

The court awarded the plaintiff substantial indemnity costs, noting the seriousness of alleging fraud and subsequently abandoning the motion when the affiant recanted.

The court fixed costs at $20,000 plus disbursements, reflecting a reduction for delays caused by the plaintiff's counsel's health issues.