Weslease 2018 Operating LP v. Eastgate Pharmaceuticals Inc.

Weslease 2018 Operating LP v. Eastgate Pharmaceuticals Inc.

The motion judge correctly found no binding settlement because the alleged agreement was conditional on unpaid arrears and conditions were unmet; the appellants failed to identify competing credibility issues in the evidentiary record that would require a trial; and appellants provided no evidence to displace the motion judge's assessment of damages, so summary judgment and the order for delivery up and conditional payment were properly granted.

Citation
2021 ONCA 743
Parties
Plaintiff (respondent): Weslease 2018 Operating LP; Defendant (appellant): Eastgate Pharmaceuticals Inc.; Defendant (appellant): Proactive Supply Chain Solutions Inc.; Defendant (appellant): Salvatore Mancuso; Defendant (appellant): Chris Pearcey; Defendant (appellant): Giancarlo Staffieri; Defendant (appellant): Anna Gluskin
Court
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
22 October 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal From Summary Judgment / Court of Appeal Decision on Appeal From Superior Court Summary Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Settlement Agreement, Repossession, Delivery Up, Damages, Costs
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Contract Property Law Secured Transactions Remedies Summary Judgment Settlement Agreement Repossession +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 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Weslease 2018 Operating LP

Plaintiff (respondent)

Eastgate Pharmaceuticals Inc.

Defendant (appellant)

Proactive Supply Chain Solutions Inc.

Defendant (appellant)

Salvatore Mancuso

Defendant (appellant)

Chris Pearcey

Defendant (appellant)

Giancarlo Staffieri

Defendant (appellant)

Anna Gluskin

Defendant (appellant)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal From Summary Judgment / Court of Appeal Decision on Appeal From Superior Court Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the parties entered into a binding settlement agreement
  2. 2 Whether credibility issues in the record gave rise to a genuine issue requiring trial
  3. 3 Whether the motion judge erred in assessing damages and relief

Ratio Decidendi

The motion judge correctly found no binding settlement because the alleged agreement was conditional on unpaid arrears and conditions were unmet; the appellants failed to identify competing credibility issues in the evidentiary record that would require a trial; and appellants provided no evidence to displace the motion judge's assessment of damages, so summary judgment and the order for delivery up and conditional payment were properly granted.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Summary judgment granted in favour of the respondent upheld
  • Appellants ordered to deliver the remaining two pieces of equipment or pay respondent $60,000 upon proof respondent refunded that amount to the third party purchaser