Summary Judgment Application: Plaintiffs sought summary judgment against all defendants except Neil John Richardson. The application was dismissed for The Lougheed Block Inc. and other defendants.
Claims Against HCC:
Investments and MSAs: Plaintiffs invested through HCC in loans to Lougheed. HCC released funds without securing proper mortgage registration or guarantees, resulting in lost investments after Lougheed’s foreclosure.
Duty of Care: HCC failed to exercise reasonable care. However, plaintiffs did not prove their loss was directly caused by HCC’s actions.
Claims Against JR Smith:
Corporate Veil: Plaintiffs failed to show that HCC was Smith’s puppet or that he engaged in fraudulent/improper conduct.
Misrepresentations: Allegations against Smith were vague and lacked evidence of statutory breaches or personal duty.
Legal Principles:
Summary Judgment: Rule 7.3(1) of the Alberta Rules of Court and relevant case law (Hyrniak v Mauldin, Weir-Jones, Hannam).
Corporate Veil: Criteria for piercing the corporate veil (control and wrongful act).
Duty of Care: Standard of care in MSAs and limitation of liability clauses.
Conclusion:
The application for summary judgment against HCC and Smith was dismissed. Plaintiffs failed to establish causation of loss and Smith’s personal liability.
Costs: Parties may appear in Chambers for submissions on costs if they cannot agree.
