COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO
CITATION: Tridelta Investment Counsel Inc. v. GTA Mixed-Use Developments GP Inc., 2019 ONCA 967
DATE: 20191206
DOCKET: M50889 (C67118)
Lauwers, Paciocco and Fairburn JJ.A.
BETWEEN
Tridelta Investment Counsel Inc., Tridelta Fixed Income Fund
and Tridelta High Income Balanced Fund
Applicants (Respondents/Moving Parties)
and
GTA Mixed-Use Developments GP Inc., Mixed-Use Developments
(Ontario) GP Inc. and Wasaga Developments
and Infrastructure GP Inc.
Respondents (Appellants/Responding Parties)
Christopher Naudie and Louis Tsilivis, for the moving parties
Simon Bieber and Michael Darcy, for the responding parties
Heard and released orally: November 29, 2019
REASONS FOR DECISION
[1] The moving parties brought an application under the Limited Partnerships Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. L.16 to compel the responding parties to provide financial information. The application judge granted the relief they sought and the responding parties appealed the order. The moving parties seek to quash the appeal on the basis that the application judge’s order was interlocutory not final.
[2] We disagree with that characterization. The application judge’s order brought to an end the moving parties’ application and finally determined their entitlement to financial information under the Limited Partnerships Act. The fact that the parties are engaged in other litigation has no bearing on this basic fact. The old and clear principle in Buck Brothers Ltd. v. Frontenac Builders Ltd. (1994), 19 O.R. (3d) 97 (C.A.) captures the case perfectly.
[3] The motion is dismissed for oral reasons given plus costs at $5,000, all inclusive.
“P. Lauwers J.A.”
“David M. Paciocco J.A.”
“Fairburn J.A.”