Bernstein et al v. Stoytcheva-Todorova et al

Bernstein et al v. Stoytcheva-Todorova et al

The counterclaimants failed to prove the necessary elements of their claims: the Bernstein defendants had reasonable and probable cause to commence litigation and did not act by unlawful means necessary for tortious interference or conspiracy; there was no evidentiary basis of an agreement with Bariatrix to refuse supply; abuse of process and malicious prosecution were not established; defamation claims arising from litigation materials were barred by absolute privilege; and unjust enrichment lacked evidentiary foundation. Accordingly the counterclaims were dismissed with costs.

Citation
2007 BCSC 14
Parties
Plaintiff / Defendant by Counterclaim: Stanley Karl Bernstein; Plaintiff / Defendant by Counterclaim: Post Road Health and Diet Inc.; Defendant / Plaintiff by Counterclaim: Daniela Stoytcheva-Todorova; Defendant / Plaintiff by Counterclaim: Vesselin Todorov; Defendant / Plaintiff by Counterclaim: Veda Healthy Weight Loss Centre Inc.; Defendant by Counterclaim: Roderick (Rod) Egger; Defendant by Counterclaim: Christiane LeBlanc; Defendant by Counterclaim: Bariatrix Nutrition Inc.
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
5 January 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil (tort, Defamation, Counterclaim) / Trial Reasons for Judgment (counterclaim Dismissed)
Outcome
Counterclaims dismissed as against all defendants by counterclaim with costs.
Legal Topics
Intentional Interference With Economic Relations, Conspiracy, Abuse of Process, Malicious Prosecution, Trade Secrets and Confidentiality, Unjust Enrichment, Absolute Privilege for Litigation Documents, Refusal to Supply / Commercial Boycott
Source Language
English
Tort Law Defamation Competition Law Civil Procedure Employment Law Equitable Relief Intentional Interference With Economic Relations Conspiracy +6 more

Case Brief

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stanley Karl Bernstein

Plaintiff / Defendant by Counterclaim

Post Road Health and Diet Inc.

Plaintiff / Defendant by Counterclaim

Daniela Stoytcheva-Todorova

Defendant / Plaintiff by Counterclaim

Vesselin Todorov

Defendant / Plaintiff by Counterclaim

Veda Healthy Weight Loss Centre Inc.

Defendant / Plaintiff by Counterclaim

Roderick (Rod) Egger

Defendant by Counterclaim

Christiane LeBlanc

Defendant by Counterclaim

Bariatrix Nutrition Inc.

Defendant by Counterclaim

Procedural Posture

Civil (tort, Defamation, Counterclaim) / Trial Reasons for Judgment (counterclaim Dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 intentional interference with economic relations
  2. 2 conspiracy including restraint of trade
  3. 3 malicious prosecution

Ratio Decidendi

The counterclaimants failed to prove the necessary elements of their claims: the Bernstein defendants had reasonable and probable cause to commence litigation and did not act by unlawful means necessary for tortious interference or conspiracy; there was no evidentiary basis of an agreement with Bariatrix to refuse supply; abuse of process and malicious prosecution were not established; defamation claims arising from litigation materials were barred by absolute privilege; and unjust enrichment lacked evidentiary foundation. Accordingly the counterclaims were dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Counterclaims dismissed as against all defendants by counterclaim with costs.

Orders

  • Counterclaims dismissed as against all defendants by counterclaim with costs.