Skip to content
Join our Newsletter

Food cart business dispute lands in court

A dispute over the ownership of a food cart business is at the heart of a lawsuit filed October 14 in BC Supreme Court.

A dispute over the ownership of a food cart business is at the heart of a lawsuit filed October 14 in BC Supreme Court.

Plaintiff Jason Jew is suing Michael Wiese, Stephen Wiese, Chris Hong Yu Li also known as Chris Li, 0904365 B.C. Ltd. and John Doe Co. doing business as La Brasserie Street.

In the suit, Jew alleges that the defendants breached a shareholders’ agreement for the creation of a food cart business.

The suit claims that Li approached Jew, based on Jew’s experience in establishing and operating street food establishments, to help Li establish a food cart business at the intersection of Georgia and Granville Streets.

“Mr. Jew agreed to assist Mr. Li as his business partner and Mr. Jew in that capacity was instrumental in establishing the concept, design, and marketing for what would become the ‘La Brasserie Street’ food cart,” the claim alleges.

The suit claims that the numbered company was created pursuant to the shareholders’ agreement and that Michael Wiese, Stephen Wiese, Li and Jew were directors and shareholders.

It alleges that, in breach of that agreement, the defendants excluded Jew from the management of La Brasserie Street and profits due to him.

Jew is seeking damages for breach of contract and inducement to breach contract; $1,968 in special damages; and orders that the food cart business’ financial statements be produced and that the company purchase Jew’s shares and compensate him for losses suffered.

A response to the civil claim filed November 8 denied that any shareholders’ agreement existed. It denies any wrongful conduct, shareholder oppression, breach of contract and inducement to breach of contract. It states that Jew incorporated the numbered company but denies that Michael Wiese, Stephen Wiese and Li were directors or shareholders of the company.

“Any records with the registrar of companies showing M. Wiese, S. Wiese and Li as directors or officers of the company are wrong,” the response claimed.

None of these allegations have been proven in court. •