CITATION: Fedel v. Tan, 2011 ONCA 73
DATE: 20110128
DOCKET: C49693
COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO
O’Connor A.C.J.O., Cronk and Watt JJ.A.
BETWEEN:
Joseph Fedel
Applicant (Respondent)
and
Kenneth Tan, Gum Products International Inc., Quality Powderizing Limited, PG Properties Limited, Gum Products International Worldwide Inc., Polenton Pacific Corporation, Sunginvest Holdings Ltd., Tanvest Ltd.
Respondents (Appellants)
Alan J. Lenczner, Q.C., and Jordan Goldblatt, for the appellants
A.M. Robinson and A. Stephens, for the respondent
Heard: March 15, 2010
On appeal and cross-appeal from the judgment of Justice Peter A. Cumming of the Superior Court of Justice dated September 16, 2008, with reasons reported at (2008), 2008 46697 (ON SC), 93 O.R. (3d) 274.
ENDORSEMENT
[1] This endorsement addresses the appellants’ submission that this court’s order should set aside para. 1 of the judgment below as it applies to PG Properties Limited (“PGP”).
[2] We do not accept this submission. Even if it could be said that the amended Notice of Appeal raised this issue, the appellants’ oral argument on appeal did not. The parties did not engage on this issue before this court.
[3] Moreover, we find merit in the respondent’s argument that if this issue had been raised, the respondent may well have cross-appealed the trial judge’s conclusion that there was insufficient evidence to quantify the respondent’s claims for damages against PGP other than the claim based on the $160,000 loan.
[4] In any event, we are satisfied that the finding of oppression against PGP in para. 1 of the trial judgment was not based solely on the $160,000 loan. Leaving aside that loan, there was ample evidence to support the finding.
[5] We, therefore, decline the appellants’ request.
“D. O’Connor A.C.J.O.”
“E.A. Cronk J.A.”
“David Watt J.A.”