Stromsten v. Horvatincic

Stromsten v. Horvatincic

Material misrepresentations and nondisclosure on the ex parte application were established; as a result the court set aside the majority of the injunction but retained Paragraph 2 (removal of plaintiff as authorized signing officer) and Paragraph 3 (prohibition on transacting with BlueSky bank accounts while...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2023 BCSC 2338
Parties
Plaintiff/defendant by Counterclaim: Matt Stromsten; Defendant/plaintiff by Counterclaim: Mary Horvatincic; Defendant by Counterclaim: BlueSky Organics Corporation; Defendant by Counterclaim: Mayan Standard Enterprises Corporation
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
7 September 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Shareholder Dispute With Family Law Context; Injunction and Shareholder Remedies / Application to Set Aside Ex Parte Injunction; Interlocutory Oral Reasons Following Hearing
Outcome
Ex parte injunction largely set aside for material nondisclosure and misrepresentation; limited portions retained and costs awarded to plaintiff on Scale B basis; special costs deferred to trial judge.
Legal Topics
Ex Parte Injunctions, Material Nondisclosure, Misrepresentation to Court, Access to Corporate Records, Costs
Source Language
english
Civil Procedure Corporate Law Shareholder Disputes Injunctions Family Law Evidence Ex Parte Injunctions Material Nondisclosure +3 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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Matt Stromsten

Plaintiff/defendant by Counterclaim

Mary Horvatincic

Defendant/plaintiff by Counterclaim

BlueSky Organics Corporation

Defendant by Counterclaim

Mayan Standard Enterprises Corporation

Defendant by Counterclaim

Procedural Posture

Civil Shareholder Dispute With Family Law Context; Injunction and Shareholder Remedies / Application to Set Aside Ex Parte Injunction; Interlocutory Oral Reasons Following Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was material nondisclosure/misrepresentation on the ex parte application
  2. 2 Whether the ex parte injunction should be set aside in whole or in part
  3. 3 Whether plaintiff should be restrained from bank transactions and signing authority

Ratio Decidendi

Material misrepresentations and nondisclosure on the ex parte application were established; as a result the court set aside the majority of the injunction but retained Paragraph 2 (removal of plaintiff as authorized signing officer) and Paragraph 3 (prohibition on transacting with BlueSky bank accounts while permitting access to account information); defendant ordered to pay plaintiff Scale B costs and application for special costs deferred to trial judge.

Court Disposition

Ex parte injunction largely set aside for material nondisclosure and misrepresentation; limited portions retained and costs awarded to plaintiff on Scale B basis; special costs deferred to trial judge.

Orders

  • Set aside the April 26, 2021 ex parte Injunction except for Paragraphs 2 and 3
  • Paragraph 2 to remain: plaintiff removed as an authorized signing officer of BlueSky Organics Corporation