Rindt v. Rindt
Ronald Rindt
Law Firm / Organization
Harris & Company LLP
Lawyer(s)

Kyle Sandulescu

Robert Rindt
Law Firm / Organization
Zacharias Vickers McCann LLP
Heidi Rindt
Law Firm / Organization
Zacharias Vickers McCann LLP
Erwin Rindt
Law Firm / Organization
Zacharias Vickers McCann LLP
Richard Rindt
Law Firm / Organization
Zacharias Vickers McCann LLP
Russell Rindt
Law Firm / Organization
Zacharias Vickers McCann LLP
Ryan Rindt
Law Firm / Organization
Zacharias Vickers McCann LLP
Roy Rindt
Law Firm / Organization
Zacharias Vickers McCann LLP
Western Turf Farms Ltd.
Law Firm / Organization
Zacharias Vickers McCann LLP
Fraser Valley Turf 2001 Inc.
Law Firm / Organization
Zacharias Vickers McCann LLP
Ecotech Natural Turf Systems Ltd.
Law Firm / Organization
Zacharias Vickers McCann LLP
Getsod.com Ltd.
Law Firm / Organization
Zacharias Vickers McCann LLP
Roots and Wings Distillery Inc.
Law Firm / Organization
Zacharias Vickers McCann LLP

Background: Ronald Rindt, the plaintiff, operated a turf farm in Vernon, and his siblings and their associated companies, the defendants, operated one in Abbotsford. The dispute arose from a 2018 settlement agreement, which required the defendants to supply up to 10 acres of turf to Ronald in 2019 and 2020. In April 2020, the defendants refused to deliver the turf.

Legal Arguments/Issues

  • Plaintiff's Claims: Ronald sought to strike parts of the defendants’ response and their notice of civil claim, alleging breach of the 2018 settlement agreement.
  • Defendants' Claims: The defendants sought to join their action with the plaintiff's and to remove the plaintiff’s action from fast track litigation. They counterclaimed for defamation, negligent/fraudulent misrepresentation, intentional interference with economic relations, breach of fiduciary duty, and unjust enrichment.

Held: The defamation claims were struck due to lack of specificity and failure to meet pleading requirements. The claims for intentional interference with economic relations were also struck but with leave to amend. The negligent/fraudulent misrepresentation claims were also dismissed without leave to amend. The court ordered the two actions to be heard together, removing the plaintiff’s action from fast track.

Costs: Each party bore their own costs as overall success was evenly divided. The document did not specify the total amount of costs or awards in favor of any party.

Supreme Court of British Columbia
S227945
Corporate & commercial law
Other