Our Legal Team

Recent Cases

• Casa Loma Residents Association v. 555 Davenport Holdings Inc., 2024 ONSC 5182 (Div.Ct.)
  

  We successfully resisted a motion to quash in the planning law context. The Ontario government, in Bill 185, purported to bar community groups from challenging planning board decisions. A developer tried to quash our appeal on those grounds. The Ontario Divisional Court rejected the developer’s arguments.

• Wang v. Li et al., 2024 ONSC 6720 (Div.Ct.)
  

  We acted successfully, on one of the early combined appeal/judicial review cases, before the Ontario Divisional Court, since the Supreme Court’s Yatar ruling

• VPC Inc. v. Transcity Logistics Inc. (and others), (Unreported: July 20, 2023) (Ont.S.C.J.)
  

  Whelton Hiutin LLP lawyers Richard Macklin, Wei Jiang, and articling students Arlene Campbell and Shae Lynn Chung were recently successful in setting aside Mareva and CPL orders obtained in a commercial dispute. The orders at issue were wide-reaching orders freezing bank accounts and preventing the sale of property. The Court found that the plaintiff VPC Group Inc. had failed to make fair disclosure when it initially obtained the orders without notice to the defendants. The Court noted “there has been far from full and fair material disclosure” and held that even if fair disclosure had been made, the orders would be lifted as VPC had failed to meet the requirements for obtaining such drastic orders. The parties agreed on costs, in favour of the Whelton Hiutin client, in the amount of $310,000.

• Arista Homes (Richmond Hill) Inc. v. Rahnama, 2022 ONCA 759
  

  Richard Macklin and Wei Jiang successfully appealed a Superior Court Ruling in the case of Arista Homes (Richmond Hill) Inc. v. Rahnama, 2022 ONCA 759. This Court of Appeal Ruling dated November 7, 2022, addresses the law on damages for cases where a purchaser is at fault for a breach of a home purchase contract. As noted by the Court of Appeal (per Fairburn A.C.J.O., Doherty and Lauwers JJ.A.), the key figure for the damages calculation is the value of the home, according to what it is sold for on the date of resale to a subsequent purchaser (see paragraph 9 of the Ruling). Other Ontario damages law cases had suggested requiring different evidence (“expert” valuation), and a different date (the date the purchaser failed to close). In our case, the Appeal Court varied the Lower Court Ruling such that damages owed to our client will include a higher “loss of bargain” amount, plus the forfeited deposit, interest and other damages. The total award to our client will be roughly $500,000.

• Cherry Cola’s Rock N’ Rolla Inc. v. Choi, (Unreported: May 7, 2021) (Ont. S.C.J.)
  

  Whelton Hiutin partner Richard Macklin and articling student Sukhdeep Gill , acted for a legendary Toronto Night Club and successfully enjoined the club's landlord from evicting it. The findings of Justice Chalmers are of Province-wide importance because they establish the wide-ranging protections available to commercial tenants in regard to the combination of the Canada Emergency Rent Subsidy program (CERS) and Regulation 763/20, made under the Commercial Tenancies Act, R.S.O. 1990 c.L.7.