Orders made under receivership proceedings could not be subject to collateral attack.
McDonald v. Brookfield Asset Management Inc.
Business associations --- Specific matters of corporate organization — Shareholders — Shareholders' remedies — Relief from oppression — Standing to apply — Miscellaneous
2016 CarswellAlta 2308
Alberta Court of Appeal
Plaintiff M moved to have action against defendant company certified — M claimed that company was liable for oppression, breach of good faith and negligent misrepresentation — Claims arose from company's valuation of investment property at approximately $1.6 billion, due to presence of limestone deposit — M claimed that improper stock trading practices caused value of company's share to collapse, leading to purchase of company by individual defendant for $50 million — Company claimed that M had no standing to bring action, and brought motion for summary judgment — Company's motion was granted — M appealed from judgment — Appeal dismissed — M's complaints regarding oppression were more properly those of corporation, not shareholders — Orders made under receivership proceedings could not be subject to collateral attack, as was being attempted by M — Evidence did not support M's claim that defendants conspired to obtain property, for less than actual value — Members of proposed class were not proper complainants, under applicable law of oppression.