D.D. Acquisitions Ltd. v. 2207889 Ontario Inc.

D.D. Acquisitions Ltd. v. 2207889 Ontario Inc.

The Court of Appeal upheld the motion judge's finding that, except for two conceded items, the appellant's discrete set-off claims did not raise genuine issues for trial and therefore need not be deducted from the promissory note judgment; further, the judge properly exercised his discretion in refusing to stay...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2011 ONCA 357
Parties
Plaintiff (respondent): D.D. Acquisitions Ltd.; Defendant (appellant): 2207889 Ontario Inc.; Defendant (appellant): 2100883 Ontario Inc. (formerly D.D. 4210 King Ltd.); Defendant (appellant): Robert Eilers
Court
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
6 May 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (collection) / Appeal From Summary Judgment on Promissory Note and Related Set Off and Stay Applications
Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Promissory Note, Set Off, Summary Judgment, Stay of Execution, Counterclaim
Source Language
english
Contract Civil Procedure Commercial Law Enforcement Promissory Note Set Off Summary Judgment Stay of Execution +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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

D.D. Acquisitions Ltd.

Plaintiff (respondent)

2207889 Ontario Inc.

Defendant (appellant)

2100883 Ontario Inc. (formerly D.D. 4210 King Ltd.)

Defendant (appellant)

Robert Eilers

Defendant (appellant)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (collection) / Appeal From Summary Judgment on Promissory Note and Related Set Off and Stay Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the motion judge erred in refusing to give effect to purchaser's set-off claims against the promissory note
  2. 2 Whether the motion judge erred in refusing to stay enforcement of the promissory note judgment pending trial of the counterclaim
  3. 3 Whether there were genuine issues for trial on the discrete set-off claims

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal upheld the motion judge's finding that, except for two conceded items, the appellant's discrete set-off claims did not raise genuine issues for trial and therefore need not be deducted from the promissory note judgment; further, the judge properly exercised his discretion in refusing to stay enforcement of the judgment pending trial of the counterclaim.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.
  • Respondent awarded costs of the appeal fixed at $15,000 inclusive of all taxes and disbursements.