Skip to content
Join our Newsletter

Who’s Suing Whom: May 2, 2023

The latest from the B.C. Supreme Court
lawcourts-2020-web-cc
The B.C. Supreme Court in Vancouver | Chung Chow, BIV

These corporate claims were filed with the B.C. Supreme Court registry in Vancouver.

Information is derived from notices of civil claim. Civil claims have not been tested or proven in court. 

Defendants

1186634 B.C. Ltd. and West Point Pacific Holdings Inc. and Sarabjit Singh Gill and Amandeep Kaur Gill and Kalwinder Singh Dosanjh and Tarlochan Singh Sahota and Vikash Sami and Cuiling Sami and 1211121 B.C. Ltd. and 1132360 B.C. Ltd. and Ariigo Investment Ltd. and 1311067 B.C. Ltd. and Dalbir Singh Dosanjh and Jagir Kaur Dosanjh and AU Milan Holdings Inc.

Plaintiff

West Point (Queens Park) LP

Claim

Damages for breach of trust, breach of fiduciary duty and breach of contract and an order that the plaintiff holds constructive trust over eight Lower Mainland properties after the defendants, as directors of the plaintiff partnership, took out unauthorized mortgages on a property owned by the plaintiff and used the funds to purchase or build on other properties for their own gains.

Defendants

John Hancock and PI Financial Corp.

Plaintiffs

Steven Harvey and Linnell Harvey and Paytyn Le Vesconte and 1276929 B.C. Ltd.

Claim

Damages for negligence, and breach of fiduciary duty and of contract after the plaintiffs lost over $1 million due to mismanagement by the defendants of their investment accounts.

Defendants

John Hancock and PI Financial Corp.

Plaintiffs

Brian Radke and Snow Pine Ventures Inc.

Claim

Damages for negligence, and breach of fiduciary duty and of contract after the plaintiffs lost around $1.5 million due to mismanagement by the defendants of their investment accounts.

Defendant

St. Alcuin College for the Liberal Arts Society doing business as Alcuin College

Plaintiff

Montaigne Group Ltd.

Claim

Damages for breach of agreement, and an order requiring the defendant to obtain a strata plan for the college lands and transfer the ownership of an attached amenity space to the plaintiff as agreed upon after the defendant unilaterally cancelled the agreement based on an alleged breach by the plaintiff.