Here's what we do

Kramer Henderson Sidlofsky LLP recovers US$712,879.42 improperly disbursed by TD Bank

The Court of Appeal for Ontario dismissed an appeal by TD Canada Trust from a decision holding it liable for improperly disbursing US$712,879.42. After lengthy estate litigation in Kuwait, the courts in that country had determined that the money on deposit at the TD Bank belonged to Kramer Henderson Sidlofsky's client. However, long before that decision was made, the TD Bank had transferred the money to a Swiss bank account held by the client's brother. The Court of Appeal found that in doing so the Bank had not followed its own internal procedures for determining the proper owner of the funds. The Court rejected the Bank's submission that it should not be bound by the decision of the Kuwait court because it had not participated in those proceedings.

Gregory M. Sidlofsky was lead counsel.


Kramer Henderson LLP obtains interim injunction against American co-venturers in Ontario ski resort.
Kramer Henderson LLP obtained an interim injunction restraining American joint venturers in an Ontario ski resort from paying, transferring or otherwise obtaining any money from the joint venture. The joint venture agreement provided that revenues and expenses were to be allocated equally to each of the joint venturers. A judge of the Superior Court of Ontario found, on an interim basis, that the American joint venturer, which had effective control of the joint venture, had received disproportionate payments from the joint venture, and that the moving party had met the test for interim interlocutory injunctive relief set out in cases such as RJR MacDonald Inc. v. Canada (AG)(1994), 111 DLR (4th) 385.

Jeffrey W. Kramer was lead counsel.


Finding of Fraud and $350,000 Punitive Damages against 3-for-1 Pizza and Wings and its principals.
Kramer Henderson LLP acted for a franchisee who was awarded $225,000 in damages and $350,000 in punitive damages against 3-for 1 Pizza & Wings (Canada) Inc., its principals and several related companies. The franchisee was locked out on his business by the franchisor on the alleged grounds that he was in arrears of rent, at a time when an application by the franchisee to determine the correct amount of rent owing was pending before the court. The franchisor thwarted attempts by the franchisee to sell the business. The franchisor sold the business itself, and paid nothing to the franchisee, in breach of the franchise agreement. The trial judge found this an appropriate case to "pierce the corporate veil" and to hold the franchisor and its principals liable for, among other things, fraud. The trial judge found that the corporate structure had been used for "flagrantly and grossly improper means." The trial judge dismissed all of the franchisor's allegations that the franchisee had been in breach of the franchise agreement.

Gregory Sidlofsky of Kramer Henderson LLP was counsel.


Court finds triable issue as to the making or not of an agreement, notwithstanding that solicitors for the parties agree that one was made.
The plaintiffs in this case allege that an agreement was made with the defendants that the latter would pay the former $500,000 in the event that certain lands were rezoned to permit residential development. The making of the agreement is denied by the defendants. The lawyer who acted for the defendants on the transaction in question, however, takes the position in the action that an agreement had in fact been reached. The lands were rezoned.

The plaintiff moved for summary judgment, largely on the basis that the position of the defendants' lawyer was conclusive of the fact that an agreement had been reached. The court dismissed the motion on the basis that the making or not of the agreement was a genuine issue for trial.

Peter Henderson acted for the defendants.


Court dismisses claim against security company for officers' participation in employee termination.
The plaintiff, the former President of a technology company, claimed damages against a security firm for its alleged role in his termination. On a motion for summary judgment by the defendants, for whom Kramer Henderson LLP acted, the court dismissed the claim for $275 million on the basis that the cause of the plaintiff's damages, if any, was the termination and not the actions of the defendants.

Peter Henderson acted for the defendants.