3 total
Security ordered to remain for 60 days to allow appellant to seek security in trial court.
Following the partial dismissal of an appeal and the remittal of a breach of contract issue for trial, the parties made written submissions on whether security should remain in place pending the trial.
The Court of Appeal held that the issue of security should be decided by the trial court.
The court ordered the security to remain in place for 60 days to allow the appellant to move for security in the trial court.
No costs awarded as success was divided between the oppression claim and breach of contract issue.
The Court of Appeal issued a costs endorsement following an appeal where the appellant lost on the primary issue of oppression but succeeded in obtaining a new trial on an unresolved breach of contract issue.
The court found that responsibility for the failure to litigate the contract issue was divided between the parties.
Given the unusual circumstances and divided success, the court concluded that a fair costs award was for each side to bear its own costs throughout the proceedings.
Oppression claim dismissal upheld; unadjudicated breach of contract claim remitted for trial.
The appellant real estate company sued the respondents for oppression under the Business Corporations Act and for breach of contract after being locked out of a condominium project following a corporate restructuring.
The trial judge found oppression and awarded compensation but did not address the breach of contract claim.
The Divisional Court reversed the oppression finding and dismissed the entire action.
On appeal, the Court of Appeal upheld the dismissal of the oppression claim, finding the restructuring was not unfairly prejudicial because the appellant was indemnified.
However, the Court found the Divisional Court erred in dismissing the unadjudicated breach of contract claim and remitted it for trial.
