3 total
Appeal of $4 million damages award for repudiation of commercial lease agreement dismissed.
The appellant appealed a trial judgment awarding the respondent over $4 million in damages for the lost opportunity to develop a shopping plaza after the appellant repudiated an oral agreement to be the anchor tenant.
The appellant argued the trial judge erred in finding an independent oral agreement, assessing damages, and failing to consider post-agreement conduct.
The respondent cross-appealed the trial judge's 50% reduction of its disbursements.
The Court of Appeal dismissed both the appeal and cross-appeal, finding no palpable or overriding errors in the trial judge's factual findings or exercise of discretion.
Appeal dismissed; bank owed no duty to disclose unrequested credit watch information.
The appellant appealed the dismissal of its negligent misrepresentation action arising from purchases of Confederation Life commercial paper through the respondent bank.
The court held that, in the context of dealings between sophisticated commercial parties, the bank's duty of care was limited to accurately supplying the specific information requested in the quoting exercise, not broader investment-related information.
The court further held that stating the D.B.R.S. rating as R1 low was not inaccurate or misleading merely because the rating had been placed under review with negative implications.
The appeal was dismissed with costs.
Independent contractor label did not defeat vicarious liability for commercial bribery.
Commercial appeal arising from a bribery scheme that diverted a longstanding supply contract from the plaintiff to the corporate respondents.
The Court of Appeal held that the consultant and his company, although described by contract as independent contractors, functioned as integrated members of the corporate respondents' sales organization and therefore attracted vicarious liability under the organization test.
The court also held that the trial judge erred in refusing to re-open the trial after post-judgment affidavit evidence from the consultant implicated the principal officer in the bribery scheme, as the evidence was apparently credible and could not with reasonable diligence have been obtained earlier.
Judgment was granted against the corporate respondents for compensatory damages and prejudgment interest, punitive damages were not extended vicariously, and a new trial was ordered on the officer's personal liability.
