Skip to content

Narrow screen resolution Wide screen resolution Auto adjust screen size Increase font size Decrease font size Default font size default color brick color green color
CAFCOR Forum
_GEN_GOTOBOTTOM Post Reply
TOPIC:
#18567
CONSPIRACY claim against Directors & PMgr BEATS UPFRONT Motion to quash: 1589680 Ontario v TSCC 1441 2016/08/10 10:22  
A GTA court has rejected a multiple defendant condo corporation's upfront Rule 21 Motion to quash a 'predominant purpose' CONSPIRACY claim introduced into litigation by an plaintiff owner landlord. (1589680 Ontario Inc. and T.S.C.C. # 1441, 2016 ONSC 4765 issued July 25/16 http://canlii.ca/t/gsq2n )

Bottom line for now : Ultimately to be held valid or not the issue has just hurdled a sufficient reality test and may theoretically continue in litigation ( alongside 2 other 'grounds' ) instead of being quashed upfront.

A Biggy is that the Plaintiff condo landlord of retail units, also targets certain Directors & the property manager personally as co-Defendants .

1- ( The judgment itself may mis-identify the location. Against not only the condo corp but certain Directors & Property manager, the plaintiff landlord alleges nuisance, 3rd party injurious economic injury tort & “predominant purpose” conspiracy.

‘TSCC 1441’ (sic) in 2012 shut off the plaintiff's retail tenants' use of some sort of service corridor they claim to have been using lawfully for 12 years to carry out deliveries & garbage accessing etc. . . .Ticketing, towaways, new locks etc . . .

BUT the residential owners were NOT shut out. Presumably lots of disruption raised complaints )

2 - The landlord plaintiff's CONSPIRACY claim now has been allowed to accompany the condo landlord's prior alleged grounds of :

NUISANCE and

INTENTIONAL INTERFERENCE harming the plaintiff’s relationship with targetted third parties- in this case, the plaintiff's retail condo tenants.

( The latter type of claim was kicked around roughly by Canada's Supreme Court in A.I. v Bram (2014) 1 SCR 177 http://canlii.ca/t/g2wn4 Commenters with a sense of humour enjoyed tracing the lineage of the 3rd party interference claim to an obscure British decision won by a slave trader in 1793 :

Tarleton v. M’Gawley 1793 : Claimant slave trader wins compensation from a rival - master of the Othello - who fired cannon to disrupt attempts by canoe-using equitorial coastal West African locals to negotiate with the plaintiff. )

3 - Condo governancing decisions - and the decision makers themselves - facing CONSPIRACY claims ? . The tactic - & some implications for condo governance has already generated an article by Ottawa lawyer Rod Escayola ( Gowlings WLG ) URL below

4 - Bottom line for now : Valid or not the issue beats a sufficient reality test to theoretically accompany instead of being quashed upfront.

5 SEE Aug 3/16 Rod Escayola article : “Can Condo Directors be Sued for Conspiracy ?” http://condoadviser.ca/2016/08/can-condo-directors-be-sued-for-conspiracy/condo-law-blog-Ontario
  The administrator has disabled public write access.
#18568
"The defendants fired their cannons at my slave suppliers !" 2016/08/12 09:49  
"Your misgovernance harms my business venture through attacks on my condo retail tenants !" :

Will AirBnB operators ( & even dorm operators ? ) start bringing this forward too after quickie-renters get obstructed ?

One allegation allowed to proceed is INTENTIONAL INTERFERENCE harming the plaintiff’s relationship with targetted third parties ( the plaintiff's retail condo tenants). ( And will such also have to be unlawful and/or independently actionable ? )

The type of unusual claim was kicked around roughly by Canada's Supreme Court in A.I. v Bram (2014) 1 SCR 177. How well would congested civil justice be served by opening the doors wider to endless similar claims ?

Commenters with a sense of humour enjoyed tracing the lineage of the 3rd party interference claim through an obscure British decision won by a slave trader in 1793.

Your Lordship : "I'm not really a slave trader ! Actually I'm a recruiter empowering fuller CVs for interns & fresh law grads."
  The administrator has disabled public write access.
#18911
CONSPIRACY & 3rd part interference claim against Directors & PMgr 1589680 Ontario v TSCC 1441 2018/11/21 20:04  
and so 2 years later ( despite case management backlog blitz ) ONSC settlement attempt floundering amidst partial arbitral agreement. Judicial comments predict more litigation.

Interesting weaponry in war over garbage room privileges for commercial plaintiff's tenants.

But any wonder why civil justice can be lengthy & expensive

1589680 Ontario Inc. v T.S.C.C. # 1441, 2018 ONSC 6941 issued Nov 21/18 http://canlii.ca/t/hw5wj
  The administrator has disabled public write access.
_GEN_GOTOTOP Post Reply
contact webmaster