1001411 Ontario. Ltd. v. City of Toronto Economic Development Corporation
Overview
Irving Marks and Dominique Michaud represented the Toronto Economic Development Corporation ("TEDCO" a subsidiary of the City of Toronto) in defending an action brought by a tenant on the City waterfront who operated a film studio. The tenant alleged that its tenancy had been terminated in bad faith. A motion by TEDCO to strike out the allegations of bad faith on the grounds that there is no stand alone duty of good faith under Ontario law was successful and upheld on appeal in the Court of Appeal. The tenant amended the Statement of Claim to allege a contractual implied duty of good faith and this allegation was struck out on a subsequent motion. The court held that a commercial landlord has no implied contractual duty of good faith to a tenant in relation to the termination of a lease.
- 1001411 Ontario Ltd. (c.o.b Cinespace Studios Management) v. City of Toronto Economic Development Corp., [2010] O.J. No. 2386
- 1001411 Ontario Limited (Cinespace Studios Management) v. City of Toronto Economic Development corporation. To read more, click here.
- 1001411 Ontario Limited. v. City of Toronto Economic Development Corp.; 2011 CarswellOnt 13242. To read more, click here.
- 1001411 Ont. Ltd. v. City of Toronto. To read more, click here.
Lawyers
Representative Work
-
| Litigation and Dispute Resolution
INJUNCTIONS AND CPL MOTIONS
Defeated motions for Certificate of Pending Litigation and Mareva injunctions in high-stakes real estate disputes: 2235209 Ontario Inc. v. Sedona Lifestyles (Rometown) Inc., 2020 ONSC 4008. leave... -
| Litigation and Dispute Resolution
COURT OF APPEAL SUCCESS IN SHAREHOLDER DISPUTE
Resisted an appeal to uphold a favourable trial decision involving complex issues of corporate ownership and valuation: Hrvoic v. Hrvoic, 2023 ONCA 508 -
| Litigation and Dispute Resolution
RECORD-SETTING LIFTING OF PARTIAL STAY
Obtained $1.87 million partial lift of a stay pending appeal, believed to be the largest in Ontario history.Hrvoic v. Hrvoic, 2023 ONCA 27; upheld on review, 2023 ONCA 288