Jefferson Side Road: the receiver moves against the principal

Jefferson Properties Limited Partnership was set up to build a condominium project on three parcels at 39, 53 and 67 Jefferson Side Road in Richmond Hill — 96 residential units in all, being 60 stacked condominium townhomes and 36 freehold townhomes, per Factum of the Receiver (Vexatious Litigant Motion), June 26, 2026, paras. 6–7.

Justice Cavanagh appointed Albert Gelman Inc. receiver and manager on December 21, 2023. Thirty months later, the receiver's motion is not about the units. It is about one person.

What is being asked for

The receiver asks the court to declare Fanseay Wang, the principal of the debtors, a vexatious litigant — an order that would require him to obtain leave before commencing further proceedings, per Factum of the Receiver, June 26, 2026, paras. 1–2.

Its case, in a sentence, is that he has serially abused the court's processes by commencing a multiplicity of frivolous motions and appeals seeking to re-litigate final decisions, that this has deteriorated the value of the estate by forcing the receiver to incur needless professional fees, and that it has wasted court time and resources, per Factum of the Receiver, June 26, 2026, para. 2.

Two further heads of relief travel with it:

An injunction restraining him from disseminating the Target Price List — the confidential list of minimum prices below which the receiver cannot convey certain condominium units without attending a court hearing — in a manner contravening the non-disclosure agreement he entered into with the receiver, per Factum of the Receiver, June 26, 2026, para. 3(a).

And security for costs of $60,000 — $20,000 each in connection with three of his motions, per Factum of the Receiver, June 26, 2026, para. 3(b).

If the court will not go as far as a vexatious litigant declaration, the receiver asks in the alternative for an order under Rule 37.16 prohibiting him from filing motions in this proceeding without leave, per Factum of the Receiver, June 26, 2026, para. 4.

That ladder — s. 140 declaration, failing which a proceeding-specific leave requirement — is the shape most of these motions take, and the alternative is the one courts more readily grant.

The price list

Of the three, the injunction is the one that bears directly on realisation.

A target price list in a unit-by-unit sale is the receiver's reserve. It exists so that units can be conveyed efficiently — above the number, the receiver simply closes; below it, the receiver must come to court. Its confidentiality is what makes it work, because a purchaser who knows the floor has no reason to bid above it.

The receiver's position is that Mr. Wang, who signed an NDA to receive that list, has been circulating it in a manner that contravenes the agreement. What the factum seeks is not damages but an injunction — the only remedy that helps a sale process still under way, per Factum of the Receiver, June 26, 2026, paras. 3(a), 12(b).

What other judges have already said

The factum does not rest only on the receiver's own account. It relies on findings already made in related proceedings, and those findings are the strongest part of the record.

Mr. Wang was adjudged bankrupt by order of Justice Kimmel dated December 1, 2025, and has appealed. Separately, he commenced an action against Cameron Stephens Mortgage Capital Ltd. — the senior secured creditor in this receivership — and its two principals, by statement of claim issued November 7, 2025, per Factum of the Receiver, June 26, 2026, para. 9.