43 total
OSC substitutes its own decision for IIROC panel, finding CFO breached pricing rules and imposing stricter sanctions.
Brian Sutton, former CFO of First Leaside Securities Inc., applied for a review of an IIROC panel decision finding he breached Dealer Member Rule 38.6(c) regarding the pricing of unlisted fund units.
IIROC Staff cross-applied for a review of the sanctions.
The Ontario Securities Commission found the IIROC panel made cumulative evidentiary errors, warranting a hearing de novo.
Conducting its own analysis, the Commission concluded Sutton's reliance on an illusory 'active market' to price units at $1.00 was unreasonable and breached his obligations.
The Commission set aside the IIROC sanctions and imposed a $50,000 fine, a three-year prohibition on approval as a CFO, a reprimand, and $50,000 in costs.
Privacy Relief granted
The applicant, a property owner, sought access to youth criminal justice records of seven young persons charged in connection with a house fire that destroyed his property.
The applicant sought the records to support his civil lawsuit against the youth and various organizations.
The youth respondents opposed disclosure.
The court granted partial access to police records and the Crown brief for use solely in the civil proceedings, subject to strict confidentiality conditions and identification by initials only.
A contractor's lien claim against a hotel owner was dismissed because the individuals who ordered the renovations lacked authority to bind the owner.
Dean's Standard Inc. ("Dean's") brought a construction lien claim against Siljub Toronto Ltd. ("Siljub") for renovation services provided to a hotel room.
Dean's alleged an oral contract with individuals (Mr. O and Mr. Marchuk) who represented themselves as purchasers of the hotel, arguing they had apparent authority or that Siljub ratified the contract.
The court found no actual, apparent, or ostensible authority for Mr. O and Mr. Marchuk to bind Siljub, nor any ratification by Siljub.
The court also noted Dean's failure to name the actual contracting parties (Mr. O and Mr. Marchuk) as defendants.
Dean's request to amend its pleading to add unjust enrichment was denied due to prejudice and the expeditious nature of Construction Lien Act claims.
The claim was dismissed, and the construction lien discharged.