Jonathon M. Kappy

The appellant appealed a trial judgment finding he breached a non-competition provision in a Shareholders Agreement.

The appellant argued this finding was inconsistent with the trial judge's conclusion that he did not breach a fiduciary duty when he left his employment and took a specific client's business.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, holding there was no inconsistency because the Shareholders Agreement required the appellant to relinquish his shares to avoid the non-competition provision, which he failed to do.

The appellant appealed a summary judgment dismissing his claim for damages against the respondents for breach of contract.

The appellant had an agreement with the deceased respondent granting him an option to purchase a valuable painting upon the deceased's death.

The deceased sold the painting before his death, breaching the contract.

The motion judge dismissed the claim on the basis that the appellant failed to prove he had the financial means to exercise the option.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding that the motion judge erred by assuming the role of a trial judge and that there were genuine issues for trial, including the proper option price and whether the appellant needed to show he had the means to purchase the painting.

The appellant appealed an order striking his Amended Statement of Claim against a law firm without leave to amend.

The appellant, a minority shareholder, alleged that the directors committed oppression by diverting corporate funds to pay the law firm's legal fees, and sought an order for the law firm to refund the fees.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding that the motion to strike was not barred by issue estoppel and that the amended pleading did not disclose a tenable cause of action against the law firm for knowing receipt of a benefit from oppression.