Decisions

Keep up to date on the latest Commercial List decisions.

The decisions below represent all Commercial List matters published on CanLII in the last year. This list will be updated every week. 
Decisions
  • keywords: Bankruptcy and insolvency — CCAA proceedings — Bankruptcy — Reverse vesting transaction and residualco structure — Whether residualco is a “former employer” under WEPPA during CCAA and after bankruptcy — Coordination with Monitor and claims under BIA ss. 81.3 and 81.4 — Declarations under s. 5(1)(b)(iv) and s. 5(1)(b)(i) granted — Relief granted | Statutory interpretation — CCAA court authority — WEPPA s. 5(5) and Regulations s. 3.2 — Should the supervising CCAA Court determine who is the “former employer”? — Text, context and purpose applied, Rizzo, La Presse cited — Just for Laughs Leave Decision and Lynx Air considered — Court’s jurisdiction and role under s. 5(5) confirmed — Determination made by CCAA Court | Statutory interpretation — Former employer — Meaning of “former employer” under WEPPA s. 5(1)(b)(iv) — Whether residualco qualifies despite no services provided by Former Employees — Purpose in s. 4 emphasised, reverse vesting orders transferring contracts considered — Common employer doctrine applied, O’Reilly cited — Asset sale versus RVO distinction rejected — ResidualCo found former employer — Declaration granted | Procedure — Declarations — Declaratory relief under Courts of Justice Act s. 97 — Should the Court declare that a bankrupt residualco is a “former employer” under s. 5(1)(b)(i)? — Bryton Capital criteria met, no intrusion on Minister’s s. 9 determinations — Avoiding inconsistent findings between CCAA and bankruptcy contexts — Declaration granted under s. 5(1)(b)(i)

    CanLII | Jul 7, 2026

  • keywords: Civil liability — Negligence — Duty of care and knowledge — Whether the bank owed a duty of care absent actual knowledge of fraud — Standard of actual knowledge via wilful blindness or recklessness not met — Seaquest applied to distinguish constructive from actual knowledge — Mustapha cited on negligence framework — Negligence claim dismissed | Trusts — Knowing receipt — Constructive knowledge and inquiry — Quistclose trust established over Funds under Participation Agreement — Whether constructive knowledge sufficed and reasonable inquiries required — Citadel applied, duty to inquire triggered by red flags — AML policy and failure to verify source of funds considered — Liability for knowing receipt found | Civil liability — Conversion — Funds in bank account — Does conversion apply to deposits used to repay an overdraft? — Boma cited on wrongful interference with goods — Reliable adopted to extend conversion to funds on deposit — Contrary reasoning in OBG and RIP Beverages distinguished — Elements otherwise undisputed — Liability for conversion found | Civil liability — Unjust enrichment — Juristic reason — Enrichment by repayment of Unauthorized Overdraft and corresponding deprivation — Whether valid debt to customer constitutes juristic reason vis‑à‑vis plaintiffs — Garland and Moore v. Sweet applied — No contract or disposition of law between parties — Unjust enrichment established, liability found

    CanLII | Jul 3, 2026

  • keywords: Statutory interpretation — Sanctions — SEMA and Special Economic Measures (Russia) Regulations — Deemed control under s. 2.1(2) SEMA — Whether CLR is controlled by a designated person within the Russian Regulations — Angophora Holdings Limited v. Ovsyankin applied — GAC guidance and red flags considered — No definitive finding of sanctions status — Implementation of transfer and payment conditional on Global Affairs Canada decision | Business associations — Oppression — OBCA, s. 248 — Whether non‑disclosure of overlapping interests and related‑party transactions was oppressive — BCE and Wilson v. Alharayeri framework applied — Knowledge of UCM relationship and participation in negotiations weighed — Shareholder ratification noted — Sanctions concerns not oppressive — Oppression claim dismissed | Business associations — Share valuation — Court‑ordered buyout — Valuation methodology for closely held corporation — Whether a minority discount applies to fair value — Market and adjusted net asset approaches preferred over discounted cash flow — Mid‑range enterprise value adopted — Minority discount of 10 percent applied — Buyout ordered subject to sanctions determination | Business associations — Remedies — Personal liability in oppression — Whether individual respondents should be personally liable or punitive damages awarded — Absence of deceit or bad faith found — Corporate governance imperfections insufficient — No basis for personal liability under oppression principles — Punitive damages not warranted — Personal liability denied

    CanLII | Jun 30, 2026

  • keywords: Procedure — Civil procedure — Costs endorsement — Multi‑party action settled at trial opening, remaining disputes confined to costs — Whether no order as to costs is just where claim and counterclaim were not pursued — Global settlement context, parity of exposure, symmetry of claims considered — Costs treated as equivalent and offsetting — No order as to costs | Procedure — Discontinuance — Rules of Civil Procedure, R. 23 — Does a de facto discontinuance arise without a Notice of Discontinuance and without consent or leave after close of pleadings? — Court rejects characterisation of settlement as discontinuance — R. 23 inapplicable, no automatic costs or extension for counterclaim — Rule 23 inapplicable | Procedure — Costs — Failure to prove — What are the costs consequences when neither side leads evidence on claim and counterclaim? — Both parties presumptively entitled as defendants on abandoned claims, parity assessed — Equivalence of opposing costs obligations recognised — Costs offset, no order as to costs | Procedure — Trials — Dismissal for want of evidence — Should both outstanding claims be treated as dismissed for want of evidence when no witnesses are called? — Court deems both claims effectively dismissed, neither party successful — Settlement orders on consent preserved — Claims dismissed for want of evidence | Procedure — Multi‑party litigation — Allocation of costs — How should costs be allocated where omnibus pleadings, cross‑claims and counterclaims settled, and remaining opposing claims are equivalent? — Holistic assessment preferred over artificial time parsing, symmetry drives outcome — Countervailing entitlements cancel — No order as to costs

    CanLII | Jun 30, 2026

  • keywords: Contracts — Earn-out calculations — Independent Auditor’s mandate — Whether BDO was required to determine EBITDA for the Second Earn-Out Period — Scope of BDO Engagement Letter and s. 2.9 of the SPA — Interaction with court’s prior BDO Direction — Contractual interpretation in light of GAAP and past practices — Issue remitted to expert — Direction to determine numerical EBITDA for Second Earn-Out Period — Matter sent back to BDO | Contracts — Expert determination — Manifest error — Whether BDO committed manifest errors in subcontractor costs, Kits revenue, and related party sales — Applied Industrial Technologies, LP v. Sirois referenced — Subcontractor costs challenge not manifest — Kits revenue double counting identified — Related party sales starting point corrected — Limited departures from mandate addressed — Most alleged errors rejected, two corrections directed | Contracts — Earn-out payments — Final and binding clause — Whether the BDO Report is “final and binding” such that interest is payable — s. 2.9(c) of the SPA considered — Pending determinations and identified adjustments prevent finality — Contractual interest triggered only after final determination — BDO Report not yet final and binding — Interest not yet payable | Procedure — Summary judgment — Rule 20, Rules of Civil Procedure — Whether there is a genuine issue requiring a trial — Parties’ joint position on suitability — Issues resolved by contractual interpretation and record before court — Proportionate, efficient resolution on motions — Directions issued to expert — Summary judgment granted

    CanLII | Jun 29, 2026

  • keywords: Security interests — Receivership — RSLA liens — Competing claims over trucks — Whether respondent held valid RSLA liens at appointment and surrender of possession — Receiver’s Third Report approved — Court‑ordered turnover and auction context — Lien claims found unproven and documentation unreliable — All RSLA liens over debtor’s property declared invalid and unenforceable — Motions granted | Security interests — Repairer’s lien — RSLA, s. 1(1), s. 3(1) — Was the respondent a “repairer” with an understanding of payment? — Absence of admissible evidence of authorisation and fair value — Invoices and work orders not authentic or reliable business records — Onus on lien claimant not met — Repairer status denied — Repair liens unavailable — Declaration of no repairer’s lien | Security interests — Storer’s lien — RSLA, s. 1(1) — Was the respondent a “storer” with an understanding of payment? — No evidence of any agreement for storage or delivery of invoices — Storage while defying receivership order not compensable — Boilerplate charges insufficient — Storer status not established — Storage liens rejected — Declaration of no storer’s lien | Security interests — Possessory lien — Continuous possession — Did the respondent maintain continuous possession of units? — Admission that units moved in and out of yard — No records of comings and goings — Possessory lien, once lost, cannot be re‑asserted — Continuous possession not proven — Any possessory lien extinguished — Possessory lien lost | Security interests — Non‑possessory lien — RSLA, s. 7(5) — Was a signed acknowledgement of indebtedness obtained? — Work orders unsigned by authorised persons and not acknowledgements of debt — No reliable proof of indebtedness — Statutory preconditions for non‑possessory lien not satisfied — Non‑possessory lien requirements unmet — Non‑possessory lien unenforceable

    CanLII | Jun 25, 2026

  • keywords: Bankruptcy and insolvency — CCAA s. 36 approval — Related‑party sale — Whether s. 36(3) process was reasonable and transparent — Whether s. 36(4) requirements met for sale to related persons — Soundair process and quick flips scrutinised — Monitor’s record insufficient on black‑box negotiations — Competing option-building by subordinate secured creditor noted — Sale approval dismissed | Bankruptcy and insolvency — Stay of proceedings — Extension — Whether stay should be extended pending further steps — Liquidity constraints, need for discussions with sponsor bank and potential DIP — Preservation of going concern and stakeholder interests considered — Short extension granted to facilitate next steps — Stay extended | Bankruptcy and insolvency — DIP financing — SISP — Should a priming DIP be approved and a court‑run SISP imposed now? — Contest over priming priority and funding timing — Prepack context and absence of fulsome record — Court declines to impose process prematurely — Priming DIP and imposed SISP refused | Bankruptcy and insolvency — Third‑party releases and vesting order — Whether broad releases and vesting of contractual claims appropriate — Necessity not established and releasees overbroad — Lack of service on counterparties and incomplete schedules — Material side deals require disclosure under the CCAA — Releases refused and vesting order withheld

    CanLII | Jun 24, 2026

  • keywords: Procedure — Arbitration — Appeals under Arbitration Act, 1991 — Leave to appeal — Whether alleged reconciliation errors are questions of law under s. 45 — Southam and Teal Cedar applied to distinguish law from mixed fact and law — Strategic reframing of factual findings rejected — Importance and significant effect thresholds not met — Leave to appeal dismissed | Procedure — Arbitration — Set‑aside — Section 46(1) — Whether conduct was “sufficiently egregious to offend basic notions of morality and justice” — Deference to arbitral process affirmed, Consolidated Contractors, Fuego Digital cited — Thorough, even‑handed awards found basically fair — No procedural breach meeting high bar — Application to set aside dismissed | Procedure — Arbitration — Recognition and enforcement — Section 50 — Should the court enforce the June Award, Injunction Award, Haulage Award and costs awards? — High deference to arbitral outcomes and limited appellate intervention reaffirmed — No basis to refuse enforcement identified — Amounts ordered payable within specified time — Awards enforced | Procedure — Arbitration — Jurisdiction and remedies — Injunctive relief — Did the Arbitrator exceed jurisdiction by affecting non‑parties? — Orders directed to party’s own conduct and undertakings, no adjudication of third‑party rights — Standard injunction test applied on full record — No jurisdictional overreach found — Challenge dismissed

    CanLII | Jun 17, 2026

  • keywords: Limitation periods — Acknowledgement and partial payment — Limitations Act, 2002 — Are claims on notes and guarantees time‑barred? — Receivership proceedings begun within two years for corporate instruments — Partial payments by court‑appointed receivers under s. 13(11) — Acknowledgement of personal note under s. 13(1) and emails — Contractual extension in business agreements under s. 22(5) — Limitations defence dismissed | Contracts — Promissory notes and guarantees — Alleged obstruction of sale under Retail project — Whether failure to cooperate in unit sale defeats payment obligations — Clear no set‑off and enforceability clauses in Retail Note — Term Sheet conditions precedent not incorporated into final note — No credible evidence of ready, willing and able buyer or financing — Defence rejected — Judgment granted | Civil liability — Economic torts and fiduciary duties — Alleged bad faith in 180 SAW negotiations — Do alleged breaches of fiduciary duty or good faith negate liability under clear notes and guarantees? — Prior civil claims struck without leave — No set‑off clauses bar unliquidated counterclaims — Vague, unsubstantiated allegations insufficient — No genuine issue to be tried — Defence dismissed | Contracts — Guarantees — Exhaustion of recourse condition precedent — Were demands on personal guarantees premature for failure to exhaust recourse? — Security enforced through court‑appointed receivers, assets sold, distributions made — Allocation dispute unrelated to realization — Receiver discharged in SAW project — Nothing further to exhaust against borrowers — Objection of prematurity rejected — Judgment granted

    CanLII | Jun 15, 2026

  • keywords: Bankruptcy and insolvency — CCAA — DIP financing — Interim approval of EDC DIP and DIP Charge under s. 11.2(1) — Whether a priming charge should be granted pending a de novo hearing — Urgent liquidity needs during the Shipping Window established — s. 11.2(4) factors and Monitor’s support considered — Prejudice minimal and funding certainty favours approval — DIP approved for Bridge Period | Bankruptcy and insolvency — CCAA — Restructuring governance — Whether protections should be granted to the competing Ad Hoc DIP Group during the Bridge Period — Consent, consultation, and information rights ordered to maintain a level playing field — No exclusivity to solicit alternatives — Know Your Client steps and documentation directed — Protections granted | Bankruptcy and insolvency — CCAA — Stay of proceedings — Whether to extend the stay under s. 11.02(2) — Circumstances make the order appropriate and Debtors acting in good faith and with due diligence — No opposition, Monitor supports — Needed to stabilise operations, engage stakeholders, and develop a SISP — Stay extended | Bankruptcy and insolvency — CCAA — Critical supplier payments — Whether pre-filing amounts may be paid with the Monitor’s consent under s. 11 — Goods and services integral to operations and uninterrupted supply required — Springer Aerospace Holdings Limited applied — Payments limited to suppliers agreed critical by Debtors and Monitor — Authorisation granted

    CanLII | Jun 11, 2026

Show more (1136)