On November 15, 2018, the Supreme Court of Canada granted Christine DeJong Medicine Professional Corporation’s (“DeJong”) application for leave to appeal from the decision in DBDC Spadina Ltd. v. Walton, 2018 ONCA 60. By granting leave, Canada’s highest court will weigh in on the liability of “victims” of fraud as against one another.
Continue Reading Supreme Court to Rule on Conflicting Rights of Investors in Fraudulent Schemes
Piercing the corporate veil remains a difficult feat in Ontario. Recently, in Cornerstone Properties v Southside Construction, Justice Hockin of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice refused to pierce the corporate veil to hold a corporation liable for a costs award against its subsidiary. This decision reaffirms that courts will only pierce the veil where a corporation is being abused to the point where it is not functioning as a bona fide corporate entity, and instead is being used as a vehicle to facilitate fraudulent or improper conduct.
Continue Reading Piercing the Corporate Veil – the Need for Clear Fraudulent or Improper Conduct
In Water Matrix Inc. v Carnevale, Justice Sanfilippo found that a consent judgment may survive bankruptcy if it arises from a claim that is based in fraud. This allowed a company that was defrauded by a former employee to continue to enforce the company’s judgment after bankruptcy.
Continue Reading Consent judgment survives bankruptcy
In 1169822 Ontario Ltd. v. Toronto-Dominion Bank 2018 ONSC 1631 Justice Dunphy of the Ontario Superior Court decided a case where investors in a failed Ponzi scheme sought recovery from the financial institution used by
Continue Reading Bank’s Duty of Care to victims of Ponzi Scheme
In Esfahani v. Samimi, 2018 ONCA 516 the Ontario Court of Appeal confirmed that a plaintiff pursuing a fraudulent conveyance or preference must recognize that the legal landscapes changes with a bankruptcy and that the
Continue Reading Fraudulent Conveyance Claim flounders on procedural shores
The general prohibition on false or misleading advertising under the Competition Act is somewhat unusual in that it contains two adjudicative regimes, criminal and civil, that can be used to address the same conduct –
Continue Reading The Competition Act and misleading advertising provisions
Join Baker Mckenzie’s global practitioners on Thursday, June 14 for a Deferred Prosecution Agreement Roundtable to gain important insights on:
Continue Reading Deferred Prosecution Agreements are coming to Canada. Are you prepared?
This is our third and final post on the complex fraud carried out by Norma and Ronald Walton, and the Ontario Court of Appeal decisions arising from their scheme. In our earlier posts, we focused
Continue Reading When Should a Defendant Bring a Motion for Summary Judgment in Fraud Proceedings?
A recent decision from the Ontario Superior Court demonstrates the overlap between civil and criminal findings, and how an employer can use a criminal verdict to recover additional damages in a civil claim. In Atlas
Continue Reading Employee’s Silence about Fraud Leads to $20 Million Civil Judgment for Employer
We previously reported in an article last August that Ontario Courts are increasingly finding civil fraud on the basis of material omissions, as in the United Kingdom. This trend has continued in a recent decision
Continue Reading B.C. Court finds Civil Fraud by Omission in Wang v Shao