SIF Solar Energy Income & Growth Fund v. Aird & Berlis LLP
SIF Solar Energy Income & Growth Fund
Law Firm / Organization
Moldaver Barristers
Lawyer(s)

Brett D. Moldaver

SIF Solar Energy Operating Trust
Law Firm / Organization
Moldaver Barristers
Lawyer(s)

Brett D. Moldaver

SIF #2 Solar Income & Growth
Law Firm / Organization
Moldaver Barristers
Lawyer(s)

Brett D. Moldaver

SIF #2 Operating Trust (by their Trustees: Adam S. Heinrich, Leon Zupan, Stewart Bruce, Jim Lotimer, C. Paul Storace)
Law Firm / Organization
Moldaver Barristers
Lawyer(s)

Brett D. Moldaver

SIF Capital Canada Inc.
Law Firm / Organization
Moldaver Barristers
Lawyer(s)

Brett D. Moldaver

Solar Power Income Fund GP#2 Inc.
Law Firm / Organization
Moldaver Barristers
Lawyer(s)

Brett D. Moldaver

Solar Power Income Fund GP#4 Inc.
Law Firm / Organization
Moldaver Barristers
Lawyer(s)

Brett D. Moldaver

Solar Power Income Fund GP#5 Inc.
Law Firm / Organization
Moldaver Barristers
Lawyer(s)

Brett D. Moldaver

Solar Power Income Fund GP#6 Inc.
Law Firm / Organization
Moldaver Barristers
Lawyer(s)

Brett D. Moldaver

Solar Power Income Fund GP#7 Inc.
Law Firm / Organization
Moldaver Barristers
Lawyer(s)

Brett D. Moldaver

SIF #2 Reliant Essex GP Inc.
Law Firm / Organization
Moldaver Barristers
Lawyer(s)

Brett D. Moldaver

SIF #2 Solar Income & Growth GP (A) Inc.
Law Firm / Organization
Moldaver Barristers
Lawyer(s)

Brett D. Moldaver

SIF #2 Solar Income & Growth GP (B) Inc.
Law Firm / Organization
Moldaver Barristers
Lawyer(s)

Brett D. Moldaver

SIF #2 Solar Income & Growth GP (C) Inc.
Law Firm / Organization
Moldaver Barristers
Lawyer(s)

Brett D. Moldaver

SIF #2 Solar Income & Growth GP (D) Inc.
Law Firm / Organization
Moldaver Barristers
Lawyer(s)

Brett D. Moldaver

Aird & Berlis LLP
Law Firm / Organization
Lerners LLP

2024 ONCA 946 Decision

  • The Ontario Court of Appeal partially allowed the appeal.
  • The motion judge had permanently stayed the A&B Action, ruling that it was an abuse of process to commence a separate action rather than seek leave to add A&B as a defendant in the Main Action.
  • The Court of Appeal disagreed that the A&B Action was an abuse of process but upheld a temporary stay, allowing the plaintiffs to bring a motion to add A&B to the Main Action.
  • The stay of the A&B Action remains in effect until that motion is determined. If A&B is added as a defendant, the stay may become permanent; if the motion is denied, the A&B Action may proceed.
  • The Court confirmed that the commencement of the A&B Action tolled the limitation period for claims against A&B.

2025 ONCA 170 Decision (Costs Endorsement)

  • The appeal resulted in divided success, and no costs were awarded.
  • The plaintiffs requested that the lower court’s $20,000 cost award against them be set aside.
  • The Court agreed, stating that its decision did not endorse the costs order and that divided success warranted no costs in the lower court.

Outcome

  • The A&B Action remains temporarily stayed pending a motion to add A&B to the Main Action.
  • The $20,000 costs award was set aside, with no costs awarded at either level of court.
  • Successful Party: Neither party achieved a complete victory. The appeal resulted in divided success:

    • The plaintiffs (SIF Solar Energy Income & Growth Fund) succeeded in overturning the permanent stay of the A&B Action.
    • A&B succeeded in maintaining a temporary stay, requiring the plaintiffs to seek leave to add A&B to the Main Action.
Court of Appeal for Ontario
COA-23-CV-0685
Civil litigation