COVID-19 | Ontario Announces More Businesses to Reopen During First Stage

Nick P. Poon, B.Sc. (Hons.), B.A., J.D.Business Disputes, Business Interruption, Civil Litigation, Commercial Contracts, Commercial Leasing, Contract Disputes, Contract Termination, Coronavirus, COVID-19, Debt and Enforcing Judgments, Event Cancellation, Event Termination, Real Estate Litigation, Retail Litigation, Shopping Mall Lease Disputes, Shopping Mall Lease Litigation0 Comments

Following on our previous blog last week entitled COVID-19 | Ontario Allows More Businesses To Reopen Soon, the Ontario government announced today plans for stage 1 to reopen the province, including allowing more businesses to reopen and/or relaxing restrictions on the delivery of goods and services. While the reopening of more businesses is welcome news after eight weeks in quarantine, Premier Doug Ford warned that individuals must still continue to practice social and physical distancing, and businesses should only reopen if they are ready to comply with the strict public health guidelines.  We cannot risk moving one step forward, but moving two steps back. The following is a list of some businesses that may reopen or expand their services on the following dates: May 16, 2020  Golf courses may open to the public but clubhouses only for washroom access and restaurants only for take-out (previously, golf courses could only prepare … Read More

COVID-19 | Ontario Allows More Businesses To Reopen Soon

Nick P. Poon, B.Sc. (Hons.), B.A., J.D.Business Disputes, Business Interruption, Commercial and Contract Litigation, Commercial Leasing, Construction | Builders, Contract Termination, Coronavirus, COVID-19, Creditors Rights, Debt and Enforcing Judgments, Event Cancellation, Event Termination, Force Majeure, Franchise Law, Real Estate Litigation, Retail Litigation, Shopping Mall Lease Disputes, Shopping Mall Lease Litigation0 Comments

Following on the Ontario government’s announcement last week allowing a select few businesses to re-open earlier this week, there was another announcement yesterday allowing more businesses to re-open under the same strict public and health safety guidelines. The following is a list of businesses that may re-open, and their scheduled re-opening dates over the next week: May 8, 2020:  Garden centres and nurseries can re-open for in-store payment and purchases (previously, these businesses could only offer curbside pick-up and delivery); May 9, 2020:  Hardware stores and safety supply stores can re-open for in-store payment and purchases (previously, these businesses could only offer curbside pick-up and delivery);  May 11, 2020:  Retail stores with street entrances can re-open but they can only offer curbside pick-up and delivery (previously, non-essential businesses were required to be closed). Small businesses that are planning to re-open are reminded to follow public and health safety guidelines including The … Read More

COVID-19 / Coronavirus: Urgent Hearings in Small Claims Court

Nick P. Poon, B.Sc. (Hons.), B.A., J.D.Business Disputes, Business Interruption, Civil Litigation, Commercial and Contract Litigation, Commercial Leasing, Condo Litigation, Construction Litigation, Contract Disputes, Contract Termination, Coronavirus, COVID-19, Creditors Rights, Debt and Enforcing Judgments, Event Cancellation, Event Termination, Fraud Recovery, Mortgage Litigation, Real Estate Litigation, Retail Litigation, Shopping Mall Lease Litigation0 Comments

Since March 16, 2020, all hearings in the Ontario Small Claims Court have been suspended due to the COVID-19 pandemic.  Although the Superior Court of Justice has had procedures in place to bring an urgent civil or commercial list hearing since March 15, 2020, the Small Claims Court was left without the ability to hear urgent motions and garnishment hearings until today. Today, the Chief Justice of the Superior Court of Justice released the updated Notice Regarding the Suspension of Small Claims Court Operations to outline the procedure to request an urgent hearing in Small Claims Court and to provide guidance on the type of matters a judge may find to be urgent.  Urgent  hearings may include: Cases in which a judgment debtor has an outstanding warrant for arrest issued in relation to a Small Claims Court proceeding; or Time-sensitive cases that would result in immediate and serious financial hardship … Read More

A Guide to Urgent Residential Eviction Orders and Enforcement During COVID-19

Nick P. Poon, B.Sc. (Hons.), B.A., J.D.Building | Property Management, Civil Litigation, Commercial Leasing, Contract Disputes, Contract Termination, Coronavirus, COVID-19, Debt and Enforcing Judgments, Real Estate Litigation0 Comments

On March 19, 2020, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice suspended the eviction of residents from their homes, pursuant to eviction orders issued by the Landlord and Tenant Board or writs of possession, during the COVID-19 pandemic, unless ordered otherwise in an urgent motion. On the same day, the Landlord and Tenant Board suspended all hearings related to eviction applications and suspended the issuance of eviction orders, unless the matter related to an urgent issue such as an illegal act or a serious safety threat. Urgent Eviction Order or Urgent Enforcement? 1.  If the landlord requires an urgent eviction order, then the landlord should proceed to file an urgent application with the Landlord and Tenant Board. 2.  If the landlord already has an eviction order (or writ of possession) and requires urgent enforcement, then an urgent motion should be made to the Superior Court of Justice under Rule 60.17 of … Read More

Toronto Lawyers for COVID-19 / Coronavirus Urgent Legal Services

David Alderson, LL.B, LL.M (Commercial and Corporate), Q.Arb, Lawyer and ArbitratorAlternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), Arbitration, Business Disputes, Business Interruption, Civil Litigation, Commercial, Commercial and Contract Litigation, Condo Litigation, Construction Litigation, Coronavirus, COVID-19, Debt and Enforcing Judgments, Estates Litigation, Family Law, Franchise Law, Wills and Estates0 Comments

See our information and resources regarding legal services during COVID-19 through these links to the Gilbertson Davis LLP website: Arbitration During the Pandemic Remote Arbitration Hearings – Emerging Protocols Arbitration & Court Closure  Contract Arbitrator Event Cancellation Arbitrator Contract Termination Arbitrator Moving Litigation to Arbitration | Arbitration Options Business and COVID-19 Ontario Allows More Businesses To Reopen Soon Ontario to Permit Some Businesses to Reopen on May 4 Small Business Relief Resources Ontario Extends Mandatory Closure of Non-Essential Businesses Ontario-Canada Emergency Commercial Rent Assistance Program Construction and COVID-19 Are Closing Dates Extended Due to Construction Sites Closing? Urgent Hearings for Real Estate Closings Contracts and COVID-19 Pandemic Closures: Considerations For Commercial Tenants And Landlords How to Schedule an Urgent Civil or Commercial List Hearing Comments on Frustration and Force Majeure Clauses in The Huffington Post Legal Consequences on Commercial Contracts Distribution Agreements Manufacturing Contracts Shopping Mall Lease Deferral Contract Disputes … Read More

Ontario Courts Suspend Civil Jury Trials Due to COVID-19 / Coronavirus

Nick P. Poon, B.Sc. (Hons.), B.A., J.D.Arbitration, Business Disputes, Business Interruption, Civil Litigation, Commercial and Contract Litigation, Commercial List Matters, Commercial Litigation, Condo Litigation, Construction Litigation, Coronavirus, COVID-19, Debt and Enforcing Judgments, Family Law, Force Majeure, Franchise Law, Real Estate Litigation0 Comments

On April 20, 2020, the Chief Justice of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice issued a Notice to the Profession, Public, Accused Persons and the Media Regarding the Suspension of Criminal and Civil Jury Trials to advise that criminal and civil jury trials will be suspended until September, 2020, at the earliest. Since March 17, 2020, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice has suspended all regular operations, including adjourning all civil matters except: (a) civil motions and applications deemed to be urgent and time-sensitive by the court; (b) outstanding warrants issued in relation to a Small Claims Court or Superior Court civil proceeding; and (c) the following expanded civil matters, subject to each region’s notice and effective April 6, 2020: (i) pre-trial conferences that were cancelled between March 16 and May 31, 2020, and to be held for the purpose of settlement; (ii) Rule 7 motions or applications for approval … Read More

Small Business Relief Resources During COVID-19 / Coronavirus

Nick P. Poon, B.Sc. (Hons.), B.A., J.D.Business Disputes, Business Interruption, Civil Litigation, Commercial, Commercial and Contract Litigation, Commercial Contracts, Commercial Leasing, Commercial Lending, Commercial Litigation, Contract Disputes, Contract Termination, Coronavirus, COVID-19, Creditors Rights, Debt and Enforcing Judgments, Distribution Agreements, Event Cancellation, Event Termination, Force Majeure, Franchise | Licensing, Government Action, Loan and Guarantee, Mortgage Enforcement, Mortgage Litigation, Real Estate Litigation, Retail Disputes, Retail Litigation, Shopping Mall Lease Disputes, Shopping Mall Lease Litigation0 Comments

On April 14, 2020, the Ontario legislature passed a bill during an emergency sitting to extend the state of emergency to May 12, 2020. The state of emergency in Ontario was initially declared on March 17, 2020, and subsequently extended to April 14, 2020.  Under the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act, any further extensions must be passed by the legislature, and can only be extended for additional periods of no more than 28 days.  On May 12, 2020, the state of emergency was extended to June 2, 2020 (Updated: May 12, 2020). Although the extension of the state of emergency does not automatically apply to individual orders such as the closure of non-essential businesses, it is expected the mandatory closure of non-essential businesses will be extended as well to combat the COVID-19 pandemic.  In addition, many small businesses (deemed essential) have voluntarily closed due to safety concerns for their … Read More

Toronto Lawyers for Large Debt Collection and Enforcement of Foreign and Local Judgments and Awards

David Alderson, LL.B, LL.M (Commercial and Corporate), Q.Arb, Lawyer and ArbitratorAppeals, Casino Debt Recovery, Commercial Lending, Commercial List Matters, Creditors Rights, Cross-Border Litigation, Debt and Enforcing Judgments, Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, Enforcement of Foreign Judgments, Forum Challenges, Heavy Industries, Injunction & Specific Performance, International Litigation, International Trade Fraud, Jurisdictional Challenges, Letters of Request, Letters Rogatory, Loan and Guarantee, Mareva Injunction, Mortgage Enforcement, Norwich Order, Of Interest to US Counsel, Offshore, Promissory Note Claims, Request for International Judicial Assistance0 Comments

Domestic and, US and Other Foreign Debt, Judgments and Awards We are often consulted or retained in connection with recovery of large local debt or foreign debt, including casino debt, or to seek recognition  and enforcement in Ontario, Canada, of judgments, orders, or arbitration awards obtained in Ontario, other provinces of Canada, US and other foreign jurisdictions. We are sometimes retained to work with the assistance of lawyers practicing debt recovery in other jurisdictions, including, those located offshore. Claims on Loan Guarantee We can advise and represent those claiming payment on a guarantee, and those named as guarantor of a loan. Loan or Gift? | Loan or Investment? Disputes sometimes arise when either a payment advanced or transfer is alleged to be a loan rather than a gift, or alleged to a loan rather than an investment, or vice-versa. We have relevant experience in both domestic and cross-border litigation. Injunctions and Other … Read More

COVID-19 / Coronavirus: Urgent Hearings for Enforcement Matters

Nick P. Poon, B.Sc. (Hons.), B.A., J.D.Civil Litigation, Commercial and Contract Litigation, Commercial Contracts, Commercial Litigation, Contract Disputes, Coronavirus, COVID-19, Creditors Rights, Debt and Enforcing Judgments, Fraud Recovery0 Comments

Further to my blog posts in respect to scheduling urgent hearings in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice for commercial lease matters and real estate closings, an urgent hearing was recently granted in an enforcement matter involving a contempt hearing against a judgment debtor. In Morris v. Onca, 2020 ONSC 1805, the judgment creditor had obtained default judgment in November 2019 for repayment of funds obtained by fraud.  The judgment creditor took steps to enforce the default judgment, including conducting examinations in aid of execution, but the process was frustrated by the judgment debtor’s refusal to answer relevant questions and his failure to comply with court orders to produce documents.  The judgment debtor did not dispute the adjudged amount was owed to the judgment creditor but provided numerous excuses for his failure to pay the default judgment and to produce documents in accordance with court orders. The judgment creditor had previously … Read More

COVID-19 / Coronavirus: Urgent Hearings for Real Estate Closings

Nick P. Poon, B.Sc. (Hons.), B.A., J.D.Civil Litigation, Coronavirus, COVID-19, Creditors Rights, Debt and Enforcing Judgments, Real Estate Litigation0 Comments

Following on my blog on scheduling urgent hearings for commercial lease matters, this blog is on the scheduling of an urgent hearing involving a real estate closing. In Ali v. Tariq, 2020 ONSC 1695, the applicant had sold her property and discovered that a writ of execution had been registered against her property during routine searches performed for the closing.  Apparently, her former father-in-law had obtained default judgment against her in small claims court and obtained a writ of execution at around the time of her divorce.  A writ of execution filed in the county or district in which the property is located will effectively prevent the sale of the property until the judgment is set aside or fully satisfied.  After the applicant’s offer to pay the sale proceeds into her lawyer’s trust account was rejected, the applicant sought an urgent hearing before the Ontario Superior Court of Justice under … Read More

Hurdles To Recognition and Enforcement Of Foreign Judgments

Sabrina Saltmarsh, B.A. (Hons), J.D.Commercial, Cross-Border Litigation, Debt and Enforcing Judgments, Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, Enforcement of Foreign Judgments, Interjurisdictional Disputes, International Litigation, International Sale of Goods, International Sale of Goods Arbitrator, International Trade Fraud, International Traders, Jurisdictional Challenges, Letters Rogatory, Of Interest to US Counsel, Offshore, Request for International Judicial Assistance0 Comments

In the recent Ontario Court of Appeal decision of H.M.B. Holdings Limited v. Antigua and Barbuda, 2020 ONCA 12, the Court of Appeal rendered a split (2-1) decision regarding the recognition of a foreign judgment which muddies the waters on the analysis to be applied to s.3(b) of the Reciprocal Enforcement of Judgments Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. R.5 (REJA) Original Judgment: In this case H.M.B. Holdings Limited (HMB) was successful in obtaining judgment on February 26, 2014, against Antigua and Barbuda from the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (the JCPC), which is the highest court of appeal for certain British territories and Commonwealth countries including Antigua and Barbuda. The case related to damages sought by HMB due to the expropriation of resort lands by the Antiguan government. The case has garnered some media attention because of the manner in which the lands were expropriated. HMB then brought a common law … Read More

Maryland judgment domesticated in Ontario

Gilbertson Davis LLPCivil Litigation, Cross-Border Litigation, Debt and Enforcing Judgments, Enforcement of Foreign Judgments0 Comments

In Kaveh v Kaveh Semnani 2019 ONSC 996, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice was asked to determine whether the Maryland Court had jurisdiction and if the judgment could be recognized and enforced in Ontario. The Plaintiff alleged that the Defendant owed him money and the Defendant argued that the Maryland Court did not have proper jurisdiction to hear the case. The Defendants did not defend the case before the Maryland Court and a default judgment was granted in their absence.  Subsequently, the Plaintiff sought to have the Maryland judgment recognized in Ontario. Real and substantial connection test The Court applied the ‘real and substantial connection test’ which functions only to test whether the Maryland Court correctly assumed jurisdiction over the matter.  The Ontario Court did not consider the facts of the original matter before the Maryland Court, except to consider if the facts would relate to any potential defence … Read More

Canadian Court Shuts Down Loan Shark’s Law Suit

R. Lee Akazaki, C.S., B.A. (Hons.), J.D.Business Law, Business Litigation, Casino Debt Recovery, Civil Litigation, Commercial Lending, Commercial Litigation, Debt and Enforcing Judgments, Real Estate Litigation0 Comments

In Canada, it is not everyday one witnesses a loan shark resorting to judicial process to collect on outstanding obligations.  In fact, outside cases involving payday loans and hidden credit card fees, where legitimate loans might inadvertently cross the 60% interest rate threshold under s. 347 of the Criminal Code,  we have to date not seen any cases where the court has considered enforcement of blatantly usurious loans bearing interest of, say, 2,000% APR, as the Superior Court did in Ikpa v. Itamunoala, now available on line. Gilbertson Davis successfully obtained summary judgment rejecting the bid by the plaintiff, a resident of the United Kingdom (where laws banning usury no longer exist), to recover USD$500,000 on a USD$100,000 promissory note that had remained outstanding for four months before the start of litigation.  The plaintiff sought to have an equitable mortgage securing the note paid out in priority to the defendants’ registered mortgage.  … Read More

Court Considers When Limitation Period Commences to Enforce Foreign Judgment

Andrew Ottaway, B.A. (Hons.), LL.B.Civil Litigation, Commercial Litigation, Cross-Border Litigation, Debt and Enforcing Judgments, Enforcement of Foreign Judgments, Injunction & Specific Performance, Of Interest to US Counsel0 Comments

In Grayson Consulting Inc. v. Lloyd, 2018 ONSC 2020 (CanLII), the plaintiff obtained a judgment in South Carolina in 2014.    The plaintiff commenced proceedings in Ontario in 2017 in respect of the South Carolina and obtained an ex parte Mareva injunction (freezing order) against the defendant.  The defendant challenged the Mareva injunction, arguing that the Ontario proceeding was commenced outside Ontario’s two-year limitation period.   The plaintiff argued, among other things, that the limitation period did not commence until the plaintiff received a report from investigators that the defendant had exigible assets in Ontario.   The plaintiff relied on the recent case of Independence Plaza 1 Associates L.L.C. v. Figliolini 2017 ONCA 44 (CanLII), in which the Court of Appeal stated that a claim based on a foreign judgment may not be “discovered” until a judgment creditor knew or ought to have known that the judgment debtor had exigible assets in … Read More

Greater Harmonization of International Commercial Arbitration Laws

David Alderson, LL.B, LL.M (Commercial and Corporate), Q.Arb, Lawyer and ArbitratorArbitration, Commercial, Commercial Arbitration, Commercial List Matters, Cross-Border Litigation, Debt and Enforcing Judgments, Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, International Sale of Goods0 Comments

Legislation based on the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration (1985), with amendments as adopted in 2006 (the “Model Law”) has been adopted in 78 States of a total of 109 jurisdictions, including Canada, Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Labrador, Northwest Territories, Nova Scotia, Nunavut, Ontario, Prince Edward Island, Quebec, Saskatchewan and Yukon. The legislation in Ontario, Canada, amends previous legislation based on the Model Law and is based on the text, with amendments as adopted in 2006, of the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration. Recent jurisdictions to enact Model Law legislation include: In 2017: Australian Capital Territory, Fiji, Jamaica, Mongolia, Qatar, and South Africa. In 2016: Myanmar, Republic of Korea, and Uganda. The continued expansion of an already substantial number of jurisdictions enacting Model Law legislation means even greater harmonization of national laws through all stages of the commercial arbitration process, from the arbitration agreement itself, to the recognition and … Read More

China Signs Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements

Andrew Ottaway, B.A. (Hons.), LL.B.Civil Litigation, Commercial and Contract Litigation, Commercial Law, Commercial Litigation, Cross-Border Litigation, Debt and Enforcing Judgments, Forum Challenges, Jurisdictional Challenges0 Comments

We previously wrote that Ontario had enacted the International Choice of Court Agreements Convention Act, 2017, which will give effect to the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements (the “Hague Convention”) in Ontario once Canada ratifies the Hague Convention.  (Canada has not yet signed or ratified the Hague Convention.) Since our previous blog post, the People’s Republic of China signed the Hague Convention. China has not yet ratified the Hague Convention, which requires approval by the National People’s Congress. China’s signing of the Hague Convention represents an important step towards more widespread adoption of the convention. The lawyers are Gilbertson Davis have experience in international litigation and arbitration, and in interpreting international conventions.   Please contact us for an initial consultation.

Construction Heavy Machinery & Equipment Disputes

David Alderson, LL.B, LL.M (Commercial and Corporate), Q.Arb, Lawyer and ArbitratorCommercial and Contract Litigation, Commercial Leasing, Construction | Builders, Construction Equipment & Machinery, Construction Litigation, Contract Disputes, Contract Termination, Debt and Enforcing Judgments, Distributors | Dealers, Heavy Industries, Heavy Machinery Disputes, Injunction & Specific Performance, Sale of Goods, Trucking and Transportation0 Comments

We have experience and can act in matters relating to construction heavy machinery and equipment. Disputes often arise in connection with the purchase and sale, leasing, financing, use or operation of construction heavy machinery.  Sometimes disputes arise in relation to ownership or possession of  construction heavy equipment. We set out below some of the common types of disputes arising in relation to construction heavy equipment. Types of Disputes Common disputes include those related to: purchase and sale, pre-sale representations, warranties, damaged equipment, sale by auction, shipping heavy machinery and equipment, damages, loss and collapse, hire-purchase disputes, ownership and possession, and repossession by court order. Types of Construction Equipment A vast array of construction equipment is deployed in modern construction projects.  Some construction companies lease and others purchase. Some have only occasional need for some construction heavy equipment. Typical construction heavy equipment and machinery includes: Backhoe loaders, breakers, bulldozers, chippers, compactors, concrete plants and pumps, conveyors, … Read More