2 total
The court ordered a single trial to avoid inconsistent judgments and removed the action from a case management pilot program due to the parties' failure to use informal procedures.
This decision addresses procedural issues in a complex civil action involving claims for delayed delivery of residential lots and a right of first refusal.
The court considered whether a previously agreed-upon bifurcated trial could proceed given new limitations defences proposed by the defendant, and whether the action should remain under a "One Judge Model" case management pilot program.
The court ruled that a single trial was necessary to avoid the risk of inconsistent judgments due to overlapping evidence and credibility issues related to the limitations defences.
Furthermore, the action was removed from the pilot program because the parties consistently engaged in formal, contested interlocutory proceedings, contrary to the program's emphasis on informal dispute resolution.
Court resolves post-judgment accounting issues in shareholder dispute, crediting franchise fees but denying other claims.
Following a judgment determining the status of shareholder loans, the parties sought guidance on four specific accounting items.
The court held that franchise fees paid by the applicants were a corporate expense and should be credited to their shareholder loans.
However, claims for reimbursement of merchandise expenses, unpaid monthly amounts to one shareholder, and a balance on a loan from a shareholder's mother were dismissed due to lack of authority, insufficient evidence, and failure to plead the claims.
