The Ontario Court of Appeal (ONCA) in Maurice v. Alles (2016) found section 4 of the Limitations Act to apply to oppression claims under the Ontario Business Corporations Act (OBCA). Accordingly, claimants must bring their oppression claims within two years of the alleged oppressive conduct, subject to discoverability. In the case of multiple oppressive acts […]
Category Archives: Complex Corporate Commercial Litigation
The Importance of Sufficiently Proving Damages
In civil litigation for breach of contract, establishing a breach is only part of the battle. The primary remedy for a breach of contract is an award of damages, in an amount sufficient to put the aggrieved party into a position it would have been if not for the breach. In order to secure an […]
Adding a Defendant & “Reasonable Discoverability”
In the course of a litigation file, misapprehensions sometimes occur. When there is confusion as to the identity of the proper defendant, sometimes the need to add a new party defendant to the action arises. Depending on how far into an action the new defendant is discovered, the statutory limitation period may help to provide […]
Security for Costs
What is an Order for Security for Costs? Granting a motion for security for costs is a discretionary remedy of the court under the Rules of Civil Procedure (the “Rules“) in favour of the defendant. The defendant will bring a motion requesting an order that the plaintiff must post security for the defendant’s litigation costs […]
Oppression Claims & The Business Judgment Rule
Oppression is defined under the Ontario Business Corporations Act as conduct that is “oppressive or unfairly prejudicial to or that unfairly disregards the interests of any security holder, creditor, director or officer of the corporation”. This conduct does not need to be illegal so long as it fits the definition set out in the legislation. […]
Setting Aside a Default Judgment
What is a Default Judgment? A default judgment is often granted in favour of a plaintiff when the defendant, although served, either fails to appear in court or respond to a claim within the predetermined time limit. Can a Party Successfully Have it Set Aside? Setting aside a default judgment is a discretionary remedy based […]
Judgment Debts, Fraud and Bankruptcy
Many people assume that bankruptcy protects them from all creditors, across the board, however, this is not the case. In certain circumstances, debts may still be enforced even after a discharge in bankruptcy. When a creditor sues a debtor and a judgment is awarded, this judgment may survive an assignment into bankruptcy in certain circumstances. […]
Norwich Orders as a Tool of Discovery
What is a Norwich Order? A Norwich order compels a third-party, usually innocent, to preserve and produce evidence in its possession to the moving party. It is a rare and extraordinary remedy generally only given in specific circumstances. It is a creature of equity and is a discretionary remedy. The goal is to obtain information […]
Mareva Injunctions: Freezing Assets Before Judgment
The remedy of a Mareva injunction is so named having adopted the name of the plaintiff company in a 1975 English Court of Appeal decision (Mareva Compania Naviera SA v. International Bulkcarriers SA). Such an order prohibits the dissipation of the defendant’s assets. In effect, it provides a form of pre-judgment execution and has the […]
Larger Limits for Smaller Claims
Many clients have smaller monetary disputes that initially may not seem worth the effort to enter into or continue with litigation. The practical realities are that such disputes soon eat up the legal budget. If it’s cheaper to pay than fight, you might as well pay or let it go. Is there an alternative? Ontario […]