Paragon Protection Ltd. et al v Tamstu-Harjon Holdings of Canada Limited et al
Paragon Protection Ltd.
Law Firm / Organization
Gardiner Roberts LLP
Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Inc.
Law Firm / Organization
Gardiner Roberts LLP
Tamstu-Harjon Holdings of Canada Limited
Law Firm / Organization
Gowling WLG (Canada) LLP
Jonathan Rosenthal in His Capacity as the Estate Trustee of Cyril Rosenthal
Law Firm / Organization
Gowling WLG (Canada) LLP
Benjamin Marrett in His Capacity as the Estate Trustee of Cyril Rosenthal
Law Firm / Organization
Gowling WLG (Canada) LLP
Jonathan Rosenthal
Law Firm / Organization
Gowling WLG (Canada) LLP
Ronald J. France
Law Firm / Organization
Gardiner Roberts LLP
DONNA FRANCE
Law Firm / Organization
Gardiner Roberts LLP
BUD RALPH
Law Firm / Organization
Gardiner Roberts LLP

Key Points:

  • Parties:

    • Plaintiffs: Paragon Protection Ltd. and Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Inc.
    • Defendants: Tamstu-Harjon Holdings of Canada Ltd., Jonathan Rosenthal and Benjamin Barrett (as Estate Trustees of Cyril Rosenthal’s Estate).
    • Counterclaim Defendants: Paragon Protection Ltd., Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Inc., Ronald and Donna France, and Bud Ralph.
  • Central Dispute:
    The case revolves around the financial and equity interests of Tamstu-Harjon Holdings in Paragon under a 1978 Consulting Agreement. This includes disputes over profit sharing, equity rights upon sale, and the regulation of remuneration for the France family controlling Paragon.

  • Motion:
    The Succeeding Estate Trustees (Jonathan Rosenthal and Benjamin Barrett) sought an order under Rule 30.1.01(8) to exempt certain documents from the “deemed undertaking” rule, allowing their use in a related estate proceeding.

  • Arguments and Decision:

    • The documents in question, referred to as the "Pervez Productions," pertain to accounting records created by Syed Pervez, a former estate trustee and accountant for Paragon.
    • Justice Osborne ruled the following:
      • The documents are relevant to the estate proceeding, including a contempt motion against Pervez for non-compliance with prior court orders.
      • The interests of justice outweighed any potential prejudice to Paragon.
      • No sealing or protective orders exist, and Pervez himself did not object to their use.
      • Relief under Rule 30.1.01(8) and exceptions for impeachment were applicable.
  • Outcome: The motion was granted, allowing the use of the Pervez Productions in the estate proceeding. The decision did not specify any monetary award, damages, or final costs determination.

Superior Court of Justice - Ontario
CV-23-00710960-00CL
Corporate & commercial law
$ 0
Defendant
07 December 2023