Ontario Court of Appeal Summaries (November 19 - 23, 2018)

There were six substantive civil decisions released by the Court of Appeal this week. There were many criminal decisions released.

In Wall v. Shaw, the Court determined that there is no limitation period to objecting to accounts in an application to pass accounts in an estates matter. A notice of objection is not a “proceeding” within the meaning of the Limitations Act, 2002.

Filed under:
Canada, Ontario, Construction, Employment & Labor, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Public, Real Estate, White Collar Crime, Blaney McMurtry LLP, Bankruptcy, Statutory interpretation, Fraud, Negligence, Constructive trust, Adverse possession, Unocal Corporation, Supreme Court of Canada
Authors:
John Polyzogopoulos
Location:
Canada
Firm:
Blaney McMurtry LLP
Revlon and unocal enhanced scrutiny rejected for dissolution plan

In Huff Energy Fund v. Gershen, C.A. No. 11116-VCS, the Delaware Court of Chancery dismissed a stockholder’s challenge to the board of director’s decision to dissolve the company following an asset sale. The Court ruled that the enhanced scrutiny standards of Revlon and Unocal do not supplant the business judgment rule in the context of a company’s decision to dissolve.

Filed under:
USA, Delaware, Company & Commercial, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, K&L Gates LLP, Shareholder, Fiduciary, Board of directors, Business judgement rule, Unocal Corporation, Delaware Court of Chancery
Authors:
Kevin P. Stichter , Nathan G. Harrill
Location:
USA
Firm:
K&L Gates LLP