Focus On

CIVIL PROCEDURE - Leave to appeal - Quia timet injunctions - Preservation of property - Mareva injunctions

Friday, September 10, 2021 @ 5:38 AM  

Lexis Advance® Quicklaw®
Application by the defendants for leave to appeal an order that granted two injunctions. The order granted a Mareva injunction prohibiting the appellants from dealing with the claimed shares in the respondent Axion Ventures and a quia timet injunction prohibiting the appellants from voting the claimed shares at any Axion meeting. The plaintiff, who sought the injunctions, claimed a beneficial interest in the claimed shares based on a series of investment agreements he allegedly made with the defendant Bonner, the former CEO of Axion, and Bonner’s wife. In 2020, the wife’s company, Cern One, sold shares to the respondent Monaker Group, including the claimed shares. At the time of the injunction application, Monaker was a non-party.

HELD: Application allowed. The appeal raised some issues that might be of significance to the practice, including the scope of the ability for the court to issue an injunction restraining the use and disposition of shares in a company, particularly in the absence of an interested party. Considering the purportedly unique nature of the injunctions and the issues arising from Monaker’s absence before the application judge, the grounds of appeal raised at least an arguable case.

Hirakawa v. Bonner, [2021] B.C.J. No. 1715, British Columbia Court of Appeal, P.G. Voith J.A., August 9, 2021. Digest No. TLD-September62021008