Sorbara v. Soja

Sorbara v. Soja

The motions judge correctly found no genuine issue for trial because the appellant's defences (fiduciary duty, duress, equitable setoff) did not raise triable issues; the appellant refused cross-examination on a core allegation; and the asserted promise lacked consideration and was therefore unenforceable, justifying summary judgment for the plaintiff.

Citation
C29910
Parties
Plaintiff (respondent): Joseph D. Sorbara; Defendant (appellant): Walter T. Soja
Court
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
2 December 1999
Procedural Posture
Civil / Appeal From Summary Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Fiduciary Duty, Duress, Equitable Setoff, Consideration, Issue Estoppel, Cross Examination
Source Language
English
Civil Contract Equity Evidence Civil Procedure Summary Judgment Fiduciary Duty Duress +4 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 4 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joseph D. Sorbara

Plaintiff (respondent)

Walter T. Soja

Defendant (appellant)

Procedural Posture

Civil / Appeal From Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was a genuine issue for trial
  2. 2 Whether fiduciary duty defence raised a triable issue
  3. 3 Whether duress defence raised a triable issue

Ratio Decidendi

The motions judge correctly found no genuine issue for trial because the appellant's defences (fiduciary duty, duress, equitable setoff) did not raise triable issues; the appellant refused cross-examination on a core allegation; and the asserted promise lacked consideration and was therefore unenforceable, justifying summary judgment for the plaintiff.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Summary judgment for plaintiff affirmed
  • Appeal dismissed with costs