Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Canada decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The Court of Appeal set aside an unequal division of increased corporate value under the Family Law Act, but upheld the support and income-imputation orders.
The court found oppressive conduct in the removal of a shareholder-director-employee before the parties’ roles were clarified, and ordered a buyout at fair market value without a minority discount.
Court held the fair value of dissenter TPCO shares was USD 0.9847 per share, not the trading price of USD 0.17, in a plan-of-arrangement dissent case.
The Court of Appeal dismissed an application to reopen this family-law appeal, holding there was no miscarriage of justice and no need for further guidance on payment terms.
The Court of Appeal dismissed an oppression remedy appeal, upholding the share buyout valuation, simple pre-judgment interest, and refusal of extra compensation.
The ValorReport, prepared by qualified experts and not effectively undermined, established a fair market value for Corkum's Electrical at $1,650,000; although Ms. Purcell held 50% of shares, her direct contributions to the operating business were limited, but section 13 required an award because approximately 42% of the business value derived from matrimonial assets held via the Numbered Company and Ms. Purcell made contributions and domestic sacrifices; accordingly the court awarded Ms. Purcell $330,000 (20% of share value), ordered equalization payments totalling $129,964.07, awarded owners…
Source excerpt
The court found the owners had no reasonable expectation of ALR exclusion in 2017, gave little weight to a conditional sale contract, and fixed fair market value at $10.5 million.
Family law trial on valuation and division of business interests in Simetra and Triquest, with child support recalculated and spousal support dismissed.
The Court held that issue estoppel did not bar determination of the valuation question, but the applications judge erred in treating the 1994 Development Regulations as independent enactments; the Development Regulations and City Act provisions were causally connected to the watershed protection scheme that produced the de facto expropriation and therefore the watershed zoning must be disregarded for compensation valuation and the matter is remitted to the Board to determine applicable uses and value.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal upheld an order finalizing a business valuation in a shareholder deadlock dispute, finding no legal error or improper exercise of discretion.
Explore more
