MacDonald v. Risley

MacDonald v. Risley

Summary judgment was granted for the plaintiff for $10,000,000 because the contemporaneous documentary evidence (emails and communications) established that the periodic cash advances were advances on dividend entitlements arising from the share reorganization and were not payments of principal under the promissory note; the defendant's contrary affidavit was self-serving, lacked particulars and did not raise a genuine issue of material fact; further, the defendant's emails acknowledging the outstanding $10,000,000 restarted the two-year limitation period, defeating the limitation defence.

Citation
2021 NSSC 250
Parties
Plaintiff: Judith Iris MacDonald (formerly Risley); Plaintiff: Judi's Holdings Limited; Defendant: John Carter Risley; Defendant: Lobster Point Holdings Limited
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
18 August 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Action (enforcement of Divorce Settlement) / Summary Judgment on the Evidence
Outcome
Summary judgment granted in favour of Judith Iris MacDonald against John Carter Risley for the amount of $10,000,000 on the Promissory Note; other claims and defendants not finally adjudicated on this motion.
Legal Topics
Promissory Note Enforcement, Limitation Period (acknowledgement), Summary Judgment Test, Dividends and Share Reorganization, Guarantee, Shareholder Remedies (put Notices, Oppression)
Source Language
English
Family Law Contract Law Civil Procedure Corporate Law Equity Promissory Note Enforcement Limitation Period (acknowledgement) Summary Judgment Test +3 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 6 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Judith Iris MacDonald (formerly Risley)

Plaintiff

Judi's Holdings Limited

Plaintiff

John Carter Risley

Defendant

Lobster Point Holdings Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Action (enforcement of Divorce Settlement) / Summary Judgment on the Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether periodic payments and identified lump sums were payments on the $10,000,000 promissory note or advances on dividends pursuant to the share reorganization
  2. 2 Whether defendant is entitled to credit against the Note for payments advanced to or for the benefit of the parties' children and their families
  3. 3 Whether the two-year limitation period had expired and whether defendant's electronic acknowledgements restarted the limitation period

Ratio Decidendi

Summary judgment was granted for the plaintiff for $10,000,000 because the contemporaneous documentary evidence (emails and communications) established that the periodic cash advances were advances on dividend entitlements arising from the share reorganization and were not payments of principal under the promissory note; the defendant's contrary affidavit was self-serving, lacked particulars and did not raise a genuine issue of material fact; further, the defendant's emails acknowledging the outstanding $10,000,000 restarted the two-year limitation period, defeating the limitation defence.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment granted in favour of Judith Iris MacDonald against John Carter Risley for the amount of $10,000,000 on the Promissory Note; other claims and defendants not finally adjudicated on this motion.

Orders

  • Judgment for the plaintiff Judith Iris MacDonald against defendant John Carter Risley in the amount of $10,000,000 on the promissory note dated March 2, 2018
  • If parties cannot agree on costs within 30 days, written submissions shall be filed: first from the Applicant within 2 weeks and then from the Defendants two weeks later