CEF: Higgerty Law Statement of Claim Section S – Oppression

This article is part of the series from the Higgerty Law statement of claim. You can read what a statement of claim and a Quistclose Trust is in the first article in this series.

This section are alleges that people expected members of District to act in accord with their religious beliefs and District didn’t.

232. The conduct of the ABC District and the Officers and Directors of the ABC District constitutes a visible departure from the standards of fair dealing, and demonstrates oppression, or unfair prejudice, or unfair disregard for the interests of the Plaintiff and the putative Class and Sub-class members.

Please note that these are allegations only and this case has not been adjudicated in a court of law. As always, if you have any legal questions or need legal advice please consult appropriate legal counsel.


From Higgerty Law Statement of Claim

S. Oppression

230. By virtue of the religious character of the ABC District, its Officers and Directors, and the unique nature and purpose of the CEF Trust and the CEF Quistclose Trust, the Plaintiffs and the putative Class and Sub-class members had a reasonable expectation that the ABC District and its Officers and Directors would avoid conflicts of interest and would not:

a. engage in dishonest and fraudulent conduct;

b. unfairly disregard the interests of the Plaintiffs and the putative Classes and Sub- classes;

c. conceal the true state of the financial affairs of the ABC District and the CEF;

d. misrepresent the state of the financial affairs of the ABC District and the CEF;

e. solicit, accept or renew deposits in the CEF when they knew or were willfully blind to the fact that the District was insolvent or on the eve of insolvency.

231. The ABC District and its Officers and Directors engaged in conduct that was oppressive, burdensome, harsh and unfair to the Plaintiffs and the putative Class and Sub-class members, and which failed to comply with the reasonable expectations of the Plaintiffs and the putative Class and Sub-class members by:

a. Engaging in dishonest and fraudulent conduct;

b. Unfairly disregarding the interests of the Plaintiffs and the putative Class and Subclass members;

c. Concealing or misrepresenting the true state of the financial affairs of the ABC District and the CEF;

d. Allowing, directing or permitting the ABC District to solicit, accept or renew deposits in the CEF when the District and its Officers and Directors knew or were willfully blind to the fact that the District was insolvent or approaching insolvency; and

e. Placing themselves in untenable conflicts of interests by serving as Directors of the ABC District while at the same time serving as:

(i) Members of the DSFM;
(ii) Directors and Officers of ECHS;
(iii) Directors and Officers of SVML, all as herein described, and

f. Failing to disclose their conflicts of interest, with the result that the legitimate interests of the Plaintiffs and the Class and Sub-class members in the CEF were not protected and were unfairly prejudiced and unfairly disregarded.

232. The conduct of the ABC District and the Officers and Directors of the ABC District constitutes a visible departure from the standards of fair dealing, and demonstrates oppression, or unfair prejudice, or unfair disregard for the interests of the Plaintiff and the putative Class and Sub-class members.

233. By virtue of the foregoing conduct, the Plaintiff and the putative Class and Sub-class members have suffered damage and loss.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Website Powered by WordPress.com.

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: