From: | Jason Neyers <jneyers@uwo.ca> |
To: | obligations@uwo.ca |
Date: | 21/10/2010 15:10:00 UTC |
Subject: | ODG: Economic Torts in the Court of Appeal |
Dear Colleagues:
Those of you interested in the unlawful means tort will be interested in Barber v. Molson Sport & Entertainment Inc., 2010 ONCA 570 (http://www.ontariocourts.on.ca/decisions/2010/september/2010ONCA0570.htm).
The facts of the case were as follows. In July 2003, a large outdoor summer concert in featuring the Rolling Stones was held to assist the tourism and hospitality industries following the outbreak of SARS. Molson sponsored the concert and held all related food, beverage and merchandising rights. Molson then sold the exclusive water rights to Vrozos and Vrozos on sold them to Wahta. Despite bringing 3 million bottles of water to the concert, Wahta only sold 250,000 bottles, resulting in significant financial losses. The reason for the low sales was that both Molson and Vrozos made side agreements with water suppliers other than Wahta despite their knowledge of the Wahta contract.
The trial judge ordered Molson to pay Wahta damages of $632,000 for intentional interference with economic relations. Vrozos was ordered to pay damages of $711,616 plus punitive damages of $50,000 for breach of contract and intentional interference with economic relations.
The Court of Appeal held that there was no basis for disturbing the trial judge's determination that Molson was liable to Wahta on the basis of intentional interference with economic relations. There was no need to prove a predominant purpose to injure, as it was sufficient to establish that Molson's unlawful conduct was in some measure directed against the plaintiffs. The sale of water rights by Molson to other parties with knowledge of the prior sale of such rights by Vrozos to the Wahta met that threshold.
An interesting part about the decision is that it is in many respects (ie, on the test for intention, the test for unlawful means) inconsistent with AK v Valcom 2010 ONCA 557, the nearly coterminous court of appeal case which decided that the Canadian law for this tort was provided by Lord Hoffmann in OBG v Allan.
I guess that sometimes the right hand of the
court does not
know what the left hand is doing.
Sincerely,
-- Jason Neyers Associate Professor of Law Faculty of Law University of Western Ontario N6A 3K7 (519) 661-2111 x. 88435