DATE: 20041217

DOCKET: M31856-C42276-C42278

COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO

RE:

HOLLINGER INTERNATIONAL INC. (Moving Party (Plaintiff/Respondent in Appeal)) v. HOLLINGER INC., THE RAVELSTON CORPORATION LIMITED and RAVELSTON MANAGEMENT INC. (Responding Parties (Defendants/Appellants)) – and – THE RAVELSTON CORPORATION LIMITED and RAVELSTON MANAGEMENT INC. (Responding Parties (Defendants/Plaintiffs by Counterclaim/Appellants)) v. HOLLINGER INTERNATIONAL INC., HOLLINGER INTERNATIONAL PUBLISHING INC. and HOLLINGER CANADIAN PUBLISHING HOLDING CO. (Moving Parties (Plaintiffs/Defendants to the Counterclaim/Respondents))

BEFORE:

DOHERTY, MOLDAVER and SIMMONS JJ.A.

COUNSEL:

Leah Price

for Hollinger Inc.

David R. Wingfield and Paul Guy

for Ravelston

HEARD: November 30, 2004

RELEASED ORALLY: November 30, 2004

E N D O R S E M E N T

[1] The appellants (responding parties on the motion) agree that both appeals are either interlocutory or final.

[2] In our view, the order of Farley J. did not finally decide any issue against the appellants or preclude resort by the appellants to the Ontario Courts after the United States proceedings had been completed. In our view, the order of Farley J. postponed the appellants’ entitlement to proceed with their counterclaim in Ontario, but did not foreclose it.

[3] While there is an obvious factual overlap between the counterclaim brought in Ontario and the U.S. proceedings, we are in no position at this time to say that any findings that may or may not be made in the American proceedings will effectively foreclose the appellants from pursuing the claims advanced in their counterclaim in the Ontario courts at the appropriate time. In the result, the appeals are quashed.

“Doherty J.A.”

“M.J. Moldaver J.A.”

“Janet M. Simmons J.A.”