ONTARIO – Oral Contracts for Sale of Land – Doctrine of Part Performance - Statute of Frauds, s. 4 -- When a buyer and a seller of land make an oral agreement for sale, the exception to section 4 of the Statute of Frauds applies if the claiming party proves that 1) all elements of the contract were agreed or acquiesced, 2) substantial steps taken to carry out the transaction making it inequitable to allow the other party to rely on the absence of a written agreement, and 3) there is some evidence of detrimental reliance, which may include the enforcing party’s inability to acquire the property -- Trial judge’s finding that doctrine of part performance applies is subject to deference on appeal.

ONTARIO – Arbitration – Enforcement – Where none of the conditions in s. 50(3)(a) to (d) of the Arbitration Act, 1991 are present, the court is required to grant judgment enforcing the award. Issues between co-respondents to an application for enforcement under s. 50 of the Act that do not engage with the questions listed under subsections 50(3)(a) to (d) are not relevant to the application.

ONTARIO – Interlocutory Remedies – Appointment of a Monitor in an action for relief from oppression – Ontario Business Corporations Act, s. 161 and Courts of Justice Act, s. 101 - The stringency of the test depends upon the precise nature of the role and mandate of the proposed court-appointed monitor.

ONTARIO – LIMITED PARTNERSHIPS – Limited partners have protection from the liabilities of a limited partnership; in return, they are entitled to payment of their share of the limited partnership’s profit upon dissolution. They do not have a right to distributions until the dissolution.

ONTARIO – Arbitration-Court intervention pursuant to s. 6 Arbitration Act, 1991-relief must be as provided under one or more other provisions of the Act- court interpretation is that s 6 is restricts court intervention and there is no automatic right of appeal from a s. 6 order.

ONTARIO – Corporations – Oppression Remedy - Canada Business Corporations Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-44 (“CBCA”) -Failure of the majority shareholder 1) to permit access to financial records of two corporations; and 2) to transfer the proceeds of sale of properties to the minority shareholders, as agreed in a shareholders’ agreement, was oppressive and unfairly prejudicial to the minority shareholders - Majority shareholder’s payment of part of the sale proceeds to himself without notice an approval of the other shareholders was also oppressive and unfairly prejudicial to the other shareholders, even after due consideration of the “business judgment rule”.