Joseph Sereda

The defendants brought a motion for summary judgment dismissing an action arising from a power outage during a wedding reception caused by a severe thunderstorm.

The plaintiffs alleged breach of contract, negligence, and emotional distress, arguing the venue failed to provide backup power and mishandled the event during the outage.

The court held that exclusion clauses in the catering agreement barred liability for damages arising from utility shortages and acts of God.

The court also found the plaintiffs failed to comply with a contractual requirement to provide written notice of any claim within 48 hours and declined to grant relief from forfeiture.

In any event, the plaintiffs failed to establish any breach of contract or negligence.

The defendants, residents of California, brought a motion to stay the proceeding on the grounds that Ontario lacked jurisdiction and was not a convenient forum.

The plaintiffs alleged the defendants breached fiduciary duties and misappropriated assets while employed by the plaintiffs.

The plaintiffs argued that because they moved their corporate operations from Quebec to Ontario after the alleged wrongs, Ontario acquired jurisdiction.

The court applied the Van Breda framework and held that a plaintiff cannot import jurisdiction by moving to a new province after the fact.

The motion was granted and the proceeding was stayed.

Following the dismissal of a third party claim, the third party defendant sought an award of costs.

No responding submissions were filed despite direction from the court.

After reviewing the submissions and the factors under Rule 57 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, the court fixed costs in favour of the third party defendant.

Costs were ordered payable forthwith by the defendants.