John Henry Reiterowski

Puri Professional Corporation (Puri PC) sought coverage under an errors and omissions insurance policy from Lloyd’s Underwriters and The Sovereign General Insurance Company (the Insurers) for a client's negligence claim related to tax advice.

The Insurers moved for summary judgment to dismiss Puri PC's claim, arguing the alleged wrongful acts occurred before the policy's retroactive date.

Puri PC brought a cross-motion for summary judgment, seeking a declaration of coverage, arguing a clerical error in the application should be rectified.

The court granted the Insurers' motion for summary judgment, dismissing Puri PC's claim, finding the retroactive date exclusion clearly applied and rectification was not warranted as the alleged acts occurred well before the policy's retroactive date.

The defendant, Lloyd's Underwriters, brought a motion for summary judgment to dismiss an action by the plaintiff, 2689686 Ontario Inc., concerning a roof collapse at a property insured under a Builder's Risk policy.

The court found that the loss was caused by frost and heaving, a peril explicitly excluded by the policy.

The plaintiff failed to provide sufficient evidence to counter the defendant's expert opinion or establish an exception to the exclusion.

Consequently, the court granted summary judgment, dismissing the action against Lloyd's Underwriters.

The applicant, Le Congrès Hellénique du Québec (CHQ), sought declarations that the respondent, Canadian Hellenic Congress (CHC), had improperly adopted its 2016 Constitution, invalidly created the Quebec Regional Council (QRC), and conducted void 2016 elections.

The court found that the 2016 Constitution was not properly adopted due to significant procedural defects and non-compliance with the 1999 Constitution's amendment procedures, which constituted a breach of contractual obligations to its constituent organizations.

The QRC was also declared improperly created as a provincial organization already existed in Quebec and no valid by-law was passed for its establishment.

While irregularities in the 2016 elections were noted, the court declined to nullify them due to lack of specific evidence impacting the result and the impracticability of the requested relief.

Certain provisions of the 2016 Constitution were declared of no force or effect until properly amended, with the corresponding 1999 Constitution provisions applying in the interim.

The plaintiffs sued the defendant purchaser for unjust enrichment and knowing receipt after the plaintiffs' employee fraudulently pocketed the proceeds from the sale of seven vehicles.

The court dismissed the unjust enrichment claim, finding that the valid contracts of sale constituted a juristic reason for the enrichment.

The knowing receipt claim was also dismissed because the defendant paid fair market value, made reasonable inquiries regarding the unusual payment methods, and was not willfully blind to the employee's fraud.