Gill v. Asian Resources Corporation
Harjinder Singh Gill
Law Firm / Organization
Richards Buell Sutton LLP
Lawyer(s)

David L. Cayley

Canadian Majha Trading Inc.
Law Firm / Organization
Richards Buell Sutton LLP
Lawyer(s)

David L. Cayley

Asian Resources Corporation
Law Firm / Organization
Not Specified
Lawyer(s)

J. Payne

Central Asian Gold Corp.
Law Firm / Organization
Not Specified
Lawyer(s)

J. Payne

Alexander Antonov
Law Firm / Organization
Unrepresented
Eugene Alexandrovich Antonov
Law Firm / Organization
Not Specified
Lawyer(s)

J. Payne

  • Facts: Harjinder Singh Gill and Canadian Majha Trading Inc. sued Asian Resources Corporation, Central Asian Gold Corp., Alexander Antonov, and Eugene Alexandrovich Antonov over unpaid wages/expenses (2003-2006), a dispute on a promissory note (valued up to $1 million), and a claim for an additional 4.5% of net proceeds from the sale of mineral rights.
  • Issue: The main legal issue revolved around whether the claims were barred by the statute of limitations and if the plaintiffs were entitled to the claimed amounts.
  • Court's Ruling: The court dismissed the claims for unpaid wages/expenses and the dispute over the promissory note due to being statute-barred. However, it allowed the claim for an additional 4.5% of net proceeds to proceed to trial, as it was not barred by any statute of limitations.
  • Costs/Damages Awarded: The document did not specify the amount of costs or damages awarded to the successful party, as the focus was on the legal determination of the statute of limitations and the admissibility of claims to proceed to trial.
Supreme Court of British Columbia
S227439
Corporate & commercial law
Defendant