COVID-19 / Coronavirus: How to Schedule an Urgent Civil or Commercial List Hearing

Nick P. Poon, B.Sc. (Hons.), B.A., J.D.Business Disputes, Civil Litigation, Commercial, Commercial and Contract Litigation, Commercial Contracts, Commercial Law, Commercial Leasing, Commercial List Matters, Commercial Litigation, Contract Disputes, Contract Termination, Coronavirus, COVID-19, Injunction & Specific Performance, Real Estate Litigation0 Comments

On March 15, 2020, the Chief Justice of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice released a Notice to the Profession advising that all scheduled civil hearings were adjourned until further notice.  The Notice to the Profession provides a procedure to schedule urgent and time-sensitive motions and applications where immediate and significant financial repercussions may result without a hearing.  When motion or application materials are filed, by email to the appropriate courthouse, seeking an urgent hearing, the triage judge will determine whether or not the matter is urgent and should be scheduled for a hearing. There have been a few recent endorsements reported in respect to the scheduling of urgent commercial lease matters. In Oppong v. Desoro Holdings Inc., 2020 ONSC 1697, the applicant sought relief from forfeiture to set aside the landlord’s termination of the lease.  Although the application was brought promptly and scheduled to be heard on February 7, 2020, the … Read More

Nick Poon Comments on Frustration and Force Majeure Clauses for The Huffington Post

Nick P. Poon, B.Sc. (Hons.), B.A., J.D.Civil Litigation, Commercial and Contract Litigation, Contract Disputes, Contract Termination, Coronavirus, COVID-19, Event Cancellation, Event Termination, Force Majeure, Gilbertson Davis LLP News, Travel & Tour Operators, Travel & Tourism0 Comments

Nick Poon was recently asked to comment on the doctrine of frustration and force majeure clauses in the context of travel refunds during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Huffington Post article is found here: You Can Still Get a Refund for a Flight Cancellation During Coronavirus Pandemic. If you require legal advice and representation in respect to contract termination and cancellation, frustration of contract and force majeure clauses and/or travel and tourism, please contact us for an initial consultation.

Contract Arbitrator – Event Cancellation Dispute Arbitrator, Force Majeure Clause Dispute – Reasonable Fees and Good Availability – Gilbertson Davis LLP Arbitration and Mediation Chambers

David Alderson, LL.B, LL.M (Commercial and Corporate), Q.Arb, Lawyer and ArbitratorAgency Arbitrator, Arbitration, Arbitrators, Brokerage Arbitrator, Business Arbitrator, Business Dispute Arbitrator, Civil Litigation, Commercial, Commercial Arbitration, Commercial Arbitrator, Commercial Contracts, Commercial Lease Arbitrator, Condo Arbitrator, Contract Disputes, Contract Termination, Coronavirus, COVID-19, Employment Dispute Arbitrator, Energy Arbitrator, Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, Franchise Arbitrator, Infrastructure Arbitrator, International Commercial Arbitrator, International Joint Venture Arbitrator, Internet Arbitrator, Investment Arbitrator, IT Arbitrator, Joint Venture Arbitrator, Licensing Arbitrator, Marine Arbitrator, Maritime Arbitrator, Partnership Arbitrator, Partnership Dispute Arbitrator, Real Estate Arbitrator, Reinsurance Arbitrator, Sale of Goods Arbitrator, Shareholder Arbitrator, Shareholder Dispute Arbitrator, Technology Arbitrator, Transportation Arbitrator0 Comments

Contract Dispute Arbitrator  An arbitrator, or an arbitration tribunal, obtains jurisdiction to adjudicate and decide a dispute from an agreement / contract which has been made by the parties to the arbitration. This jurisdiction is not typically provided by legislation, though there are exceptions, such as the arbitration provision deemed by statute to be included in a condominium declaration. Even if there is no arbitration clause in the contract or agreement made by the parties and a dispute arises, then parties to that contract may still agree to have their dispute determined by arbitration. The parties to a contract may prefer to have a dispute determined by arbitration, since it is presumptively a confidential process, it may be faster and less expensive than going to court, or they may wish to participate in the selection of the adjudicator. Common Contractual Issues Arbitrated – Cancellation and Force Majeure Clause  One of … Read More

Legal Consequences of COVID-19 / Coronavirus on Commercial Contracts

David Alderson, LL.B, LL.M (Commercial and Corporate), Q.Arb, Lawyer and ArbitratorArbitration, Commercial Contracts, Commercial Litigation, Contract Disputes, Contract Termination, Coronavirus, COVID-19, Cross-Border Litigation, Distributors | Dealers, Fashion Industry, International Joint Venture Arbitrator, International Sale of Goods, International Traders, Manufacturers | Re-Sellers, Marine | Maritime | Aviation, Sale of Goods, Textiles and Apparel0 Comments

Impact of COVID-19 / Coronovirus Events on International and Domestic Commercial Contracts  The reports from China show that COVID-19 / Coronavirus not only has a tragic impact on the lives of very many, but has already caused the consequential events of closure of manufacturing, halting exports and affecting transportation operations. This can be caused by forced movement of labour, government-ordered closure and / or state sanction and embargo, or the business decision to cease production. Interruption of Supply, Outsourcing and Transportation of Goods   This often has serious consequences for Canadian companies dependent upon foreign supply, outsourcing of manufacturing and the international carriage of goods. The central question is often whether or not the performance of a supply, outsourcing or transportation contract is legally suspended or excused because of the events surrounding the spread of COVID-19 / Coronavirus. Frustration | Impossibility  International trade and transportation contracts may not expressly refer to … Read More

Limitations in real estate agent’s opportunity is repudiation of contract

Fatima VieiraCommercial Contracts, Contract Disputes, Contract Termination0 Comments

Fatima Vieira B.A., M.A., LL.B. In Barresi and 6491243 Canada Inc. v. Jones Lang Lasalle Real Estate Services, 2019 ONCA 884  the Ontario Court of Appeal considered the test for repudiating a contract. Jones Lang Lasalle (“Lasalle”) was a real estate investment management company. Ryan Barresi (“Barresi”) was a real estate broker. Barresi and Lasalle entered into an agreement whereby Barresi was to be the Ottawa Practice Lead for investment property transactions. One year after entering into the contract, Lasalle advised Barresi that he could only pursue transactions in Ottawa up to a $10 million ceiling, even though the agreement imposed no such ceiling and transactions over $10 million would be exclusively available to another party, National Retail Investment Group (“NRIG”), which would involve Barresi only as Lasalle saw fit. The trial judge found that these two limitations undermined Barresi’s reason for entering into the contract with Lasalle, which was … Read More

Part Two – Timing is Everything in Real Estate Agreements of Purchase and Sale

Nick P. Poon, B.Sc. (Hons.), B.A., J.D.Appeals, Business Litigation, Civil Litigation, Commercial, Commercial and Contract Litigation, Commercial Contracts, Commercial Litigation, Contract Disputes, Contract Termination, Injunction & Specific Performance, Real Estate | Developers, Real Estate Litigation, Specific Performance, Summary Judgment0 Comments

I had written a previous blog on the “time is of the essence” clause in real estate agreements where it was discussed that the strict adherence to any agreed upon time limits was generally the case. A recent Ontario Court of Appeal case, Fortress Carlyle Peter St. Inc. v. Ricki’s Construction and Painting Inc., serves as a reminder that the “time is of the essence” clause is not absolute and unfettered, and there are preconditions that must be satisfied for a party to rely upon and insist on time being of the essence. The facts are not overly complicated in this case.  The respondent was a condominium developer in the process of acquiring properties for a proposed project in downtown Toronto.  The developer entered into an Agreement of Purchase and Sale (“APS”) with the vendor to acquire the subject property.  Although the APS required the vendor to provide estoppel certificates five days prior … Read More

Deposits In Failed Real Property Transactions

Sabrina Saltmarsh, B.A. (Hons), J.D.Broker and Agent Claims, Commercial, Contract Disputes, Contract Termination, Cottage Purchase and Sale, Professional Liability, Real Estate Agent and Broker, Real Estate Litigation, Recreational Property Litigation0 Comments

The recent Ontario Court of Appeal decision in Azzarello v. Shawqi, 2019 ONCA 820, illustrates the purpose of providing a deposit when purchasing real property and under what circumstances a purchaser will lose their deposit or be refunded the deposit if the sale does not go through. There are some important general principles that purchasers and sellers should be aware of regarding deposits in a real estate transaction: 1) Contemplation Regarding The Deposit In the Contract Is Important Purchasers and sellers should carefully consider the terms to be included in the purchase and sale agreement regarding the deposit. The contract should be clear about what happens to the deposit in all possible scenarios. In cases where it is not, the courts will look to implied terms in the contract and existing case law which governs how deposits are dealt with. 2) The Reason The Sale Fell Apart Is Important The … Read More

Latent Defects or Hidden Damage in Real Property Transactions

Sabrina Saltmarsh, B.A. (Hons), J.D.Agents and Brokers, Broker and Agent Claims, Civil Litigation, Commercial, Condo Litigation, Contract Disputes, Cottage Litigation, Cottage Purchase and Sale, Misrepresentation, Professional Liability, Real Estate Agent and Broker, Real Estate Litigation, Recreational Property, Recreational Property Litigation0 Comments

What Are Latent Defects Or Hidden Damages? Latent defects or Hidden Damage are defects to a property that are not generally discoverable by a prospective purchaser on a reasonable inspection and ordinary vigilance. This can include issues such as, faulty electrical wiring hiding behind the walls or a well-hidden termite or mold problem. Many real estate purchases include a buyer’s right to inspect the property to be purchased. However, these inspections are not exhaustive, and may not reveal latent defects or hidden problems with the property that are not readily visible. Why Do Participants In A Real Estate Transaction Need To Be Concerned About Latent Defects Or Hidden Damage? The problem latent defects or hidden damage can pose for a prospective real estate purchaser is that no amount of vigilance on a visual inspection can uncover such a defect, even one conducted with a home inspector (who’s inspections are typically … Read More

Manufacturers and Distributors – Toronto Litigation Lawyers

David Alderson, LL.B, LL.M (Commercial and Corporate), Q.Arb, Lawyer and ArbitratorBrand Protection, Business Litigation, Business Torts | Economic Torts, Commercial, Commercial and Contract Litigation, Commercial Arbitration, Commercial Litigation, Contract Disputes, Contract Termination, Counterfeit Goods, Cross-Border Litigation, Dealership Agreements, Distribution Agreements, Distributors | Dealers, Domain Name Disputes, eCommerce | Online Retail, Passing Off, Retail Disputes, Retail Litigation, Technology and Internet, Textiles and Apparel, Trademark Infringement0 Comments

Our lawyers can provide sound advice and effective representation to manufacturers and distributors involved in actual or potential disputes or litigation.  We focus on a wide variety of manufacturing industries in a broad array of legal disputes, including sale of goods, branding and brand protection, transportation and logistics, supply and outsourcing contracts, unpaid accounts, internal business disputes, construction and urgent remedies. The automotive industry, the food and beverage industry and technology industries in the Toronto – Waterloo Innovation Corridor comprise the most substantial sectors of the Ontario manufacturing landscape. We also can provide advice and representation to the many other manufacturing industries in Toronto and elsewhere in Ontario, including these: Automated Machinery and Robotics, Automotive Industry, Auto Parts Manufacturing, Building Materials, Canning and Bottling, Chemical Manufacturing and Supply, Clean Tech, Computer Equipment and Electronic Equipment, Concrete, Brick, Glass, Drywall, Lumber and Stone, Confectionery, Food and Beverage, Financial Technology, Furniture Manufactures and Importers, , Bottling, Packaging and Containers, Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning – HVAC, Insulation and Environmental Solutions, … Read More

Fork In the Road: Critical Considerations by Condominium Corporations in Anticipatory Failed Closings

Gilbertson Davis LLPAppeals, Appellate Advocacy, Civil Litigation, Commercial, Commercial Contracts, Condo Construction, Condo Litigation, Contract Disputes, Real Estate Litigation0 Comments

In 1179 Hunt Club Inc. v. Ottawa Medical Square Inc., 2019 ONCA 700, the purchasers, Ottawa Medical Square Group, entered into an Agreement for Purchase and Sale to purchase condominium units owned by the vendor, 1179 Hunt Club Inc. The value of the commercial condominium units in the Hunt Club Project was $5.6 million dollars. Five days before closing, the purchasers, sent a request to the vendor, requesting an extension of time as the purchasers had not yet finalized their arrangements for financing. Three days before closing, the vendor advised that it would insist on closing, and if the purchaser could not close, it would exercise its rights and remedies under the Agreement for Purchase and Sale. On the date of closing, the vendor learned that the Land Registry Office had made an error in assigning parcel identification numbers. Although this error was ameliorated later that day, this mishap, prevented … Read More

Condominium Limitation Periods and Timelines – Mark Your Calendar!

Fatima VieiraCivil Litigation, Commercial, Commercial Arbitration, Commercial Litigation, Condo Construction, Condo Litigation, Construction | Builders, Construction Litigation, Contract Disputes0 Comments

There is continuing intense activity in condominium development in Toronto, the Greater Toronto Area, Hamilton and the Niagara region. Once a condominium corporation is formed by registration of a declaration, it has a lot to do and review, within specific time lines. Getting the essential work done within those specific time lines is crucial to the protection of the rights and remedies of developers, condominium corporations and unit owners. Warranty review time lines occur at one-year, two-year and seven-year marks. If a one-year warranty claim is made, a 120-day period follows for repair or resolution by the builder. If there is no resolution and repairs are incomplete, the condominium corporation has 30 days to request conciliation or assistance with resolution of outstanding issues from the warranty provider.   The conciliation process typically involves inspection by a warranty services representative who then renders a decision as to whether the claims are … Read More

When May an Academic Complaint be Brought to Court? Clarification from the Ontario Court of Appeal

Yona Gal, J.D., LL.MAdministrative Law, Contract Disputes, Jurisdictional Challenges0 Comments

In Lam v University of Western Ontario, 2019 ONCA 82, the Ontario Court of Appeal reiterated that courts have jurisdiction over claims for damages for breach of contract and tort even when the claims arose out of an academic dispute. Judicial History After commencement of the action by the student, the university brought a motion for summary judgment.  The principal basis for the motion was that the student’s claim related to the university’s decisions about teaching, mentoring, supervising and administering its Ph.D. program and therefore to matters that are “purely academic in nature” [para 22].  The motion judge granted summary judgment dismissing the action.  The motion judge held that academic issues must be distinguished from legal issues when reviewing a university’s conduct, and that academic issues are to be resolved by the university’s internal process, subject to judicial review [para 23]. In reversing the motion judge’s decision, the Court of … Read More

Irreparable Harm for Injunctive Relief Determined by Court, Not Agreement

Yona Gal, J.D., LL.MContract Disputes, Injunction & Specific Performance0 Comments

In dismissing a motion for an interlocutory injunction, the Ontario Superior Court in Homestead House Paint Co. Inc. v Jamieson, 2019 ONSC 2660 (“Homestead”), recently reiterated that a clause deeming a breach to cause irreparable harm does not displace the courts’ exclusive role to determine whether injunctive relief is appropriate and whether or not irreparable harm has been established. The RJR MacDonald Test In RJR-MacDonald v Canada (AG), 1994 SCC 117, the Supreme Court of Canada established the well-known test for an interlocutory injunction.  The moving party is required to prove that: There is a serious issue to be tried; That the moving party will suffer irreparable harm if the relief is not granted; and The balance of convenience favours granting the injunction. Irreparable Harm Irreparable harm is defined as harm that “cannot be quantified in monetary terms or which cannot be cured” [RJR-Macdonald]. In Homestead, the moving party argued … Read More

Andrew Ottaway Writes Article on CISG for Law Times

Andrew Ottaway, B.A. (Hons.), LL.B.Civil Litigation, Commercial and Contract Litigation, Commercial Law, Commercial Litigation, Contract Disputes, Cross-Border Litigation, Gilbertson Davis LLP News, International Litigation, International Sale of Goods, UNCITRAL0 Comments

The Law Times recently published an article by Andrew Ottaway on the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (the “CISG”). The article includes: a discussion of the recent case of Solea International BVBA v. Bassett & Walker International Inc., 2018 ONSC 4261 (CanLII), in which the Ontario Court applied the CISG; a discussion of the near total obscurity of the CISG in Ontario; examples of the notable differences between the CISG and the Ontario common law / Sale of Goods Act. The article can be read in its entirety here. The lawyers at Gilbertson Davis LLP have experience in commercial litigation, including cross-border litigation involving the CISG.  Contact us for an initial consultation.

Employee or Not? An Uber Problem to be Decided by Ontario Courts: Arbitration Not the Route

Yona Gal, J.D., LL.MAppeals, Arbitration, Arbitrators, Civil Litigation, Commercial, Contract Disputes, Employment0 Comments

In its first reported decision of the year, the Ontario Court of Appeal has allowed a proposed class action against Uber to proceed in Ontario court. Facts The Appellant commenced a proposed class action in January 2017. They sought, among other things, a declaration that Uber drivers are employees of Uber and governed by Ontario’s Employment Standards Act [“ESA”], as well as $400 million in damages payable to the class for alleged Uber violations of ESA provisions.  Prior to certification, Uber brought a motion to stay the proceeding, requesting the court to enforce a clause in the agreement that requires all disputes to be arbitrated in Amsterdam according to the law of the Netherlands. Ontario Superior Court of Justice The motion judge held that the arbitration clause was enforceable and stayed the action.  Applying the Supreme Court of Canada’s Seidel decision and the Ontario Court of Appeal’s TELUS ruling, the motion … Read More

Gilbertson Davis LLP Successfully Defends Against Appeal of Decision Enforcing Liquidated Damages in Settlement Contract

Andrew Ottaway, B.A. (Hons.), LL.B.Appeals, Appellate Advocacy, Business Litigation, Civil Litigation, Commercial and Contract Litigation, Contract Disputes, Fraud, Fraudulent Schemes, Gilbertson Davis LLP News, Investment Fraud, Summary Judgment0 Comments

In Haas v. Viscardi, 2019 ONCA 133, Andrew Ottaway of Gilbertson Davis LLP assisted the plaintiff in securing his settlement agreement with a defendant (in an earlier investment fraud litigation) with a liquidated damages clause.  Specifically, the defendant was required to pay $60,000 if he failed to make prompt payments under the subject settlement agreement. The defendant, after defaulting, refused to honour the liquidated damages clause.  However, on the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, the motion judge upheld the liquidated damages clause and granted judgment.  Our blog post on the motion decision can be found here. On appeal, in Haas v. Viscardi, 2019 ONCA 133, the Court of Appeal rejected the defendant’s argument that the liquidated damages clause was an unenforceable penalty clause, and upheld the motion judge’s decision granting summary judgment.  The Court of Appeal also enforced the provision in the settlement agreement requiring that the defendant pay the plaintiff’s … Read More

Ontario Court Considers United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods on Summary Judgment Motion

Andrew Ottaway, B.A. (Hons.), LL.B.Civil Litigation, Commercial, Commercial and Contract Litigation, Commercial Litigation, Contract Disputes, Cross-Border Litigation, International Sale of Goods, Sale of Goods0 Comments

In Solea International BVBA v. Bassett & Walker International Inc., 2018 ONSC 4261, the Ontario Court of Appeal had directed the Superior Court to rehear a motion for summary judgment applying the provisions of the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (“CISG”), representing a rare instance of the Ontario Court explicitly considering the CISG.   The case involved the sale of shrimp by the plaintiff to the defendant.  The defendant argued, among other things, that it was not required to pay for the shrimp because the plaintiff breached a fundamental term of the contract, being provision of  a Health Certificate with a statement guaranteeing that the shrimp was free of certain diseases. The defendant argued that as a result of breach of a fundamental term, it was entitled to declare the contract avoided (pursuant to Article 49 of the CISG). In rejecting that defence, the … Read More