A B.C. Supreme Court judge who likened a years-long legal battle among different cricket organizations to “multiple civil wars” says the people involved need to park their egos and get back to running the sport.

Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada.

• Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account.
• Get exclusive access to the Vancouver Sun ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on.
• Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists.
• Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists.
• Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword.

Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada.

• Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account.
• Get exclusive access to the Vancouver Sun ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on.
• Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists.
• Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists.
• Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword.

Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience.

• Access articles from across Canada with one account.
• Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments.
• Enjoy additional articles per month.
• Get email updates from your favourite authors.

Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience.

• Access articles from across Canada with one account
• Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments
• Enjoy additional articles per month
• Get email updates from your favourite authors

Sign In or Create an Account

or View more offers

B.C.’s West Coast Cricket Organization and three other provincial cricket groups have been fighting Cricket Canada, alleging the federal group broke its own constitution and bylaws.

Justice David Crerar called the dispute “acrimonious, contentious and complex” and said it was “driven by egos.”

He cited violations by all sides, and ordered Cricket Canada to hold a special general meeting with an independent arbitrator, as requested by the petitioners. He also ordered Cricket Canada to reverse a suspension of the Alberta Cricket Association, calling it a clear and blatant oppression because it was conducted by email, against its bylaws.

The petition by provincial organizations in B.C., Alberta, Saskatchewan and Ontario against Cricket Canada and two named directors, involved 19 different people, seven of whom are Cricket Canada directors, and many are from the provincial associations, he wrote.

Crerar also noted there were 51 affidavits filed in the case and its history includes criminal charges against one of Cricket Canada’s directors.

But he said “blessedly,” the parties agreed on the applicable law, Canada’s Not-for-profit Corporations Act.

He said the court must treat non-profits as it treats a business, including making orders or appointing directors or receivers, if it finds oppression, unfair prejudice or unfair disregard against members or others.

1. Advertisement 1

   Story continues below

   This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

He found Cricket Canada’s governance “difficulties and internal struggles” are not recent and are rooted in previous controversies. That involved Cricket Canada not registering correctly with the Canada Revenue Agency and failing to file yearly financial statements and then filing incomplete documentation when it back-filed dating to 2016, Crerar wrote.

The second controversy involved fraud and theft under $5,000 charges coming to light a year ago against then Cricket Canada CEO Salman Khan, when he was president of the Calgary and District Cricket League.

Khan wasn’t asked to leave Cricket Canada’s board until December, after the Centre for Ethics in Sport suspended Cricket Canada from the Canadian safe sport program because Khan failed to meet its obligations.

Cricket Canada also came under fire after it cancelled a licensing agreement with the organizer of an annual cricket tournament to instead sign with another organization weeks later for a 25-year term, Crerar wrote. The petitioners say it was done without “requisite board approval,” according to the ruling.

There was also a disagreement in January about Cricket Canada voting, again by email, to replace the West Coast Cricket Organization with the days-old Pacific Coast Cricket Association as the entity that controls cricket in B.C. That involved the B.C. Mainland Cricket Association, B.C.’s largest, backing Pacific Coast.

“The timing strongly indicates that BCMCA’s move is simply another rearguard action designed to stymie the present (court) petition,” Crerar wrote.

But he said the B.C. move will have to be heard separately because the court won’t explore or resolve every example of “dysfunction” raised by the parties.

“It is clear that this civil war permeates cricket associations across Canada at the club, provincial and federal levels,” he said.

He agreed with petitioners that Cricket Canada suspended the Alberta Cricket Association’s membership in an “unauthorized email chain vote.” A director alleged Alberta’s executives used inflammatory and accusatory language and openly challenged its authority to run the national association.

Crerar also said the “squabbles before the court appear to be driven at least in part by the egos and ambitions of named individuals,” which would be “fine” if they paid for it.

“But all of the parties to this petition are charitable organizations, operating on donations, player fees and taxpayer dollars,” and funds are not being used to promote cricket but to “hire eight lawyers … to generate four thick binders of materials, all at great cost.”

He said he was inclined to “stop the bleeding” by appointing a receiver over Cricket Canada, but noted the petitioners hadn’t asked for that and the courts are to respect societies’ autonomy.

But he threatened that if “these disputes and dysfunctions continue” after his orders, “it may well be appropriate” for the petitioners to file another petition to oust directors and “return those organizations to their proper mission.”

Calls requesting comment left with the lawyers of the petitioners and defendants weren’t returned before deadline.