Amphenol Canada Corp v. Sundaram, 2020 ONSC 328
| Judge | F.L. Myers J. |
| Court | Superior Court of Justice of Ontario (Canada) |
| Case Date | January 16, 2020 |
| Jurisdiction | Ontario |
| Citations | 2020 ONSC 328 |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
3 practice notes
-
Woods v. Jahangiri,
...the other: RJR-MacDonald, at p. 341; Christian-Philip v. Rajalingam, 2020 ONSC 1925, at para. 33. In Amphenol Canada Corp v. Sundaram, 2020 ONSC 328 (Div. Ct.), at paras. 37-39, F.L. Myers J. stated that “the defendants’ ability to pay is very much a part of the interlocutory injunction cal......
-
Ice District Development Partnership v Hahn, 2020 ABQB 786
...the other: RJR-MacDonald, at p. 341; Christian-Philip v. Rajalingam, 2020 ONSC 1925, at para. 33. In Amphenol Canada Corp v. Sundaram, 2020 ONSC 328 (Div. Ct.), at paras. 37-39, F.L. Myers J. stated that “the defendants’ ability to pay is very much a part of the interlocutory injunction cal......
-
Impact of Mareva injunctions on alleged fraudsters
...Canada Corp v. Sundaram, 2020 ONSC 328 (“Amphenol Canada“), the Ontario Divisional Court confirmed that a prima facie showing of fraud and dissipation in the context of a Mareva injunction may have additional consequences for defendants, including presumed prejudice in terms of that defenda......
2 cases
-
Woods v. Jahangiri,
...the other: RJR-MacDonald, at p. 341; Christian-Philip v. Rajalingam, 2020 ONSC 1925, at para. 33. In Amphenol Canada Corp v. Sundaram, 2020 ONSC 328 (Div. Ct.), at paras. 37-39, F.L. Myers J. stated that “the defendants’ ability to pay is very much a part of the interlocutory injunction cal......
-
Ice District Development Partnership v Hahn, 2020 ABQB 786
...the other: RJR-MacDonald, at p. 341; Christian-Philip v. Rajalingam, 2020 ONSC 1925, at para. 33. In Amphenol Canada Corp v. Sundaram, 2020 ONSC 328 (Div. Ct.), at paras. 37-39, F.L. Myers J. stated that “the defendants’ ability to pay is very much a part of the interlocutory injunction cal......
1 firm's commentaries
-
Impact of Mareva injunctions on alleged fraudsters
...Canada Corp v. Sundaram, 2020 ONSC 328 (“Amphenol Canada“), the Ontario Divisional Court confirmed that a prima facie showing of fraud and dissipation in the context of a Mareva injunction may have additional consequences for defendants, including presumed prejudice in terms of that defenda......