Susin Estate v. TD Waterhouse Discount Brokerage (TD Waterhouse Canada Inc.)

Susin Estate v. TD Waterhouse Discount Brokerage (TD Waterhouse Canada Inc.)

Summary judgment was proper because the Margin Agreement authorized immediate sell-out of undermargined accounts, the unambiguous transcript of the warning call demonstrated TDW did not waive that contractual right, and there were no genuine factual conflicts requiring a trial; precedent (Questrade v. Gu) and the doctrine of waiver precluded the appellant's claim.

Citation
2022 ONCA 101
Parties
Plaintiff (appellant): John Susin, Executor of the Estate of Phyllis Susin; Defendant (respondent): TD Waterhouse Discount Brokerage, division of TD Waterhouse Canada Inc.
Court
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
4 February 2022
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, Waiver, Margin Account, Sell Out, Assignment
Source Language
English
Contract Securities Civil Procedure Summary Judgment Waiver Margin Account Sell Out Assignment

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 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Susin, Executor of the Estate of Phyllis Susin

Plaintiff (appellant)

TD Waterhouse Discount Brokerage, division of TD Waterhouse Canada Inc.

Defendant (respondent)

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether summary judgment was appropriate given factual record and alleged inaudible/compromised call recording
  2. 2 Whether TDW waived its contractual right to conduct a sell-out by giving a warning call
  3. 3 Whether the Margin Agreement and precedent (Questrade v Gu) preclude the appellant's claim

Ratio Decidendi

Summary judgment was proper because the Margin Agreement authorized immediate sell-out of undermargined accounts, the unambiguous transcript of the warning call demonstrated TDW did not waive that contractual right, and there were no genuine factual conflicts requiring a trial; precedent (Questrade v. Gu) and the doctrine of waiver precluded the appellant's claim.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Respondent entitled to costs of the appeal fixed at $10,000 inclusive of disbursements and HST