The moving parties (appellants) sought a stay of several endorsements pending their appeal of an order directing a buyout of their shares in a condominium development project.
The underlying dispute involved mutual allegations of oppression between two 50% shareholders.
The court applied the RJR-MacDonald test for a stay pending appeal.
It found no serious issue to be tried, noting the broad discretion of the motion judge under the OBCA.
While acknowledging that loss of mortgage security could constitute irreparable harm, the court concluded that the balance of convenience strongly favoured the respondents, who risked losing $25 million in financing and the entire buyout transaction if the stay were granted.
The motion for a stay was dismissed.
