The parties brought cross-motions regarding the valuation of the applicant's shares in a family holding company.
The applicant sought to have an arbitrator appointed or the issues heard in court, alleging oppression and breach of a unanimous shareholders' agreement regarding a 2008 transaction.
The respondents sought the appointment of a valuator, arguing the valuation date was fixed in 2007.
The court held that a valuator is not qualified to deal with oppression or breach of contract claims, and because a non-party to the shareholders' agreement was involved, arbitration was unavailable.
The court ordered that the oppression and breach of contract claims be dealt with by the court before any valuator is appointed.
