EasyPark is suing its legal counsel for alleged negligence after the court reversed a 2010 share transfer that briefly ousted Downtown Vancouver Association (DVA) members from EasyPark’s board.
The Parking Corporation of Vancouver, which does business as EasyPark, is a non-profit public authority that manages parkades and properties leased and owned by the City of Vancouver and joint ventures between the city and third parties.
The City of Vancouver has sole title to EasyPark’s assets and revenue.
EasyPark filed suit March 22 in BC Supreme Court against Davis LLP and lawyers Stuart Morrow and Mary Ruhl. EasyPark is seeking damages and third-party legal costs that it claims to have suffered as a result of allegedly negligent legal advice.
The suit claims that as of early 2010, EasyPark’s 10 voting shares were held by:
•five DVA members;
•four EasyPark representatives; and
•one City of Vancouver representative.
The claim alleges that Easy Park sought legal advice in March 2010 “due to an ongoing disagreement between the DVA directors and the remainder of the board regarding governance of EasyPark.”
It states that EasyPark sought legal interpretation as to whether it could lawfully “reallocate” DVA shares to EasyPark representatives without the DVA’s consent.
The court document alleges that the defendants told Easy Park the share transfer was lawful. It states that on the strength of that legal advice, the board passed motions in June 2010 to oust the DVA board members and replace them with EasyPark nominees. It further alleges that in June 2011, the DVA and DVA directors launched a petition in BC Supreme Court regarding the share transfer.
The court document states that the parties settled in July 2011, with Easy Park agreeing to:
•return the DVA shares to the then-president of the organization;
•reinstate certain bylaws that had been changed since the board shuffle; and
•pay up to $41,582 in legal costs incurred by the petitioners.
In the most recent court action, EasyPark claims that “false representations and inadequate or incomplete legal advice” caused it to lose more than $74,000 in its own legal costs plus more than $87,000 in third-party legal costs to reverse the share transfer.
EasyPark is seeking to recoup those legal costs, as well as damages.
None of the allegations has been proven in court.
As of press deadline, no response to the civil claim had been filed. EasyPark and Davis lawyers Morrow and Ruhl did not respond to interview requests by press deadline. •
