The case of FCP (BOPC) Ltd. v. Callian Capital Partners Inc., dated April 6, 2023, involved an indemnity agreements case wherein the plaintiff sought payment owed to them based on two indemnity agreements. One had been signed by the Respondent, Callian, dated October 30, 2017 (the "First Indemnity"), and the other by the Respondent, Cerieco, dated March 29, 2021 (the "Second Indemnity"). The Tenant defaulted under a lease for office premises, which led to a judgment being rendered against the Respondents on November 10, 2021. The court had awarded the Applicants, namely FCP (BOPC) LTD., ARI FCP Holdings Inc., and CPPIB FCP Holding Inc., a sum of $467,156.13. This amount had reflected unpaid rent, along with costs and interest. The court had held that the Tenant, Callian, and Cerieco were jointly liable for the Tenant's obligations and had no defense against the claim. During the proceedings, the Defendants had argued that mitigation efforts had reduced damages, citing relevant legal precedents. However, the Plaintiff had contended that the robust language of the indemnity agreements had prevented mitigation. The court had upheld the Plaintiff's argument based on precedent, and had declared that Cerieco and Callian were jointly liable to pay $505,954.32, in addition to interest. Furthermore, the court had issued an order for the Sheriff to disburse the funds held under garnishment to the Plaintiff. Additionally, an annual reconciliation process had been established to address rent differences in the coming years. Both parties had been allowed to submit their costs for consideration.