On July 11 & 18, 2003, Mr. Justice Cumming of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (Commercial List) heard an Oppression Remedy Application brought by Renegade Capital Corporation against Humpty Dumpty Snack Foods Inc. and three of its Officers. The Applicant alleged that the individual Respondents appropriated to themselves a corporate opportunity belong to Humpty Dumpty by purchasing Humpty Dumpty shares that could have been bought for cancellation by Humpty Dumpty under its Normal Course Issuer Bid.
On July 22, 2003, Renegade Capital Corporation’s Application was dismissed. Mr. Justice Cumming held that there had been no appropriation of any corporate opportunity properly belonging to Humpty Dumpty. The Judge further found that the actions of Humpty Dumpty and its Board of Directors were protected by the Business Judgment Rule and that the decision of Humpty Dumpty not to purchase all available shares itself for cancellation did not defeat the reasonable expectations of shareholders.
Humpty Dumpty was represented by Bernie McGarva and David Stevens of Aird & Berlis LLP. The individual Respondents were represented by Helder Travassos of Shibley Righton LLP.
On July 22, 2003, Renegade Capital Corporation’s Application was dismissed. Mr. Justice Cumming held that there had been no appropriation of any corporate opportunity properly belonging to Humpty Dumpty. The Judge further found that the actions of Humpty Dumpty and its Board of Directors were protected by the Business Judgment Rule and that the decision of Humpty Dumpty not to purchase all available shares itself for cancellation did not defeat the reasonable expectations of shareholders.
Humpty Dumpty was represented by Bernie McGarva and David Stevens of Aird & Berlis LLP. The individual Respondents were represented by Helder Travassos of Shibley Righton LLP.
