Multiguide Technologies Inc. v. Multiguide GmbH

Multiguide Technologies Inc. v. Multiguide GmbH

Although the appeal met the low merits threshold, the applicants failed to establish a material risk of irreparable harm from denial of a stay and the balance of convenience favoured the respondent; therefore the stay of execution was denied and no Voth order was warranted.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2022 BCCA 298
Parties
Appellants/respondents on Cross Appeal (defendants): Multiguide Technologies Inc.; Appellants/respondents on Cross Appeal (defendants): RTB Safe Traffic, Inc.; Respondent/appellant on Cross Appeal (plaintiff): Multiguide GmbH; Respondent (defendant): Rudolf Broer; Respondent (defendant): Marc Rummeny
Court
British Columbia Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
24 August 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal — Corporate/shareholder Dispute / Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal (chambers)
Outcome
Application for stay of execution dismissed; respondent entitled to execute on judgment pending appeal
Legal Topics
Characterization of Shareholder Contributions, Stay of Execution Pending Appeal, Voth Order, Irreparable Harm, Balance of Convenience
Source Language
english
Corporate Law Civil Procedure Enforcement of Judgments Commercial Law Characterization of Shareholder Contributions Stay of Execution Pending Appeal Voth Order Irreparable Harm +1 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Multiguide Technologies Inc.

Appellants/respondents on Cross Appeal (defendants)

RTB Safe Traffic, Inc.

Appellants/respondents on Cross Appeal (defendants)

Multiguide GmbH

Respondent/appellant on Cross Appeal (plaintiff)

Rudolf Broer

Respondent (defendant)

Marc Rummeny

Respondent (defendant)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal — Corporate/shareholder Dispute / Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal (chambers)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the €100,000 advance was a shareholder loan or equity contribution
  2. 2 Whether a stay of execution pending appeal should be granted
  3. 3 Whether applicants demonstrated irreparable harm if stay denied

Ratio Decidendi

Although the appeal met the low merits threshold, the applicants failed to establish a material risk of irreparable harm from denial of a stay and the balance of convenience favoured the respondent; therefore the stay of execution was denied and no Voth order was warranted.

Court Disposition

Application for stay of execution dismissed; respondent entitled to execute on judgment pending appeal

Orders

  • Application for stay of execution dismissed.
  • No Voth order granted; respondent permitted to execute on judgment pending appeal.