ONTARIO

( SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

Courl File No.: CV-08-365683

BETWEEN: Ii
"
MARIJA BLAZANIN i
I
i
Plaintiff(s} I
i
f
r
-and . !
t
I
MARKO PERKQVIC, MARK PERKOVIC a.k.a "THOMPSON" J I
SANDRA PERKOVIC !
I
Defendant(s)
I
STATEMENT OF DEFENCE AND COUNTERCLAIM
I
I: I

1. The Defendants deny, paragraph 1,2,5,7.9 and 6 of the

I'
Statement of Claim,
I
2. The Defendants admit paragraph 2, and 3, of the Statement of Claim. I
3. The Defendants have no knowledge

Statement of Claim.
of the facts in ~ragraph 8 of the Ii
I
4. The Defendants plead and the fact is that at all material times the I:!
Plaintiff, had total control of all money paid and receivec in regards I
to the tour and thatshe paid herself and expenses as she wished
and only forwarded what was left over to the Defendants.
I
I
r
I,
I
 IO.":'CC:: C"1'Lt:J r ..:v r
I
2 <1)- I
!
( 5. The Defendants plead and the fact is that it was only after she was !
!.
advised that she was not going to be in charge of the future concerts
because of her negligence and lack of proper accounting in regards I
to expenses and receipts, did she come up with the fictitious figures
that are part of this lawsuit. I
6. That the Defendants plead and the fact is that the Plaintiff could have I
I
I
paid herself what she wished for she was with the money in Canada
while they were in Croatia and received what the Plaintiff deemed as I
their share. I
I

7. At the start, the Plaintiff was offered 20% commission for organizing I
the Toronto concert, which she accepted.
I
8. The Plaintiff then offered to organize all other concerts in the tour. !
The Defendants agreed that she would organize travel to and from
the concerts, coordinate with local organizers as well as distribute
tickets, meals. hotel accommodations and would be responsible for
I
equipment venue amongst other things associated with the tour.
I
!
i
9. At the end of the tour, the Defendants met with the Plaintiff so she i~
could provide her accounting. There were money problems because

the Plaintiff was very inconsistent and made many errors in

accounting. At the end. the Plaintiff was in debt to the Defendants i
and promised payment confirming it bye-mail of some $14,125.00. I
!
The Defendants pleads a set off for this amount.

I
I

I
!.

I
!
 IO;..:>oc: tj~.lt!J

10. The Defendants plead and the fact Is that the Plaintiff then became I
persistent requesting that she handle the Defendant's future
!I
i
concerts.

11. The Defendants refused to employ the Plaintiff for future concerts
for, although, there were 6000 people at the 'roronto concert. the
Plaintiff made accounting and advised only 2,900 tickets were sold.
I
I
The Defendants plead and the fact is that the Plai ntiff pocketed the
t
difference since most sales were cash at the door. The Defendants I
i
I

therefore plead and the fact is that they are entitled to proper 1
i
!
accounting from the Plaintiff. i
1
t
12. The Plaintiff provided different accounting sheets in February, I
L
March, June, and July 2008 to the Defendants. I,.
~
l-i
i
13. The Plaintiff was negligent in her duties throughout the tour with I
I
poor airplane connections; with vans which were too small for the
band; poor choice of hotel rooms; in Los Angeles and Vancouver the
I
I

I
tour-arrived without hotel reservations. There were problems with j

sale of t-shirts, CD's, and tickets.

I
14. The Plaintiff was specifically instructed not to speak with the media I
about the concerts, but failed to follow these instructions
provided a press release to the Globe and Mail. As a result, the
and l
t

location venue cancelled the concert and then she announced to the
press that the concert will now be held at a secret place hardly
conducive to ticket sales. The Plaintiffs negligence and deliberate I
r

I
I
!
!
I
~.
 I o : ,.:n:J1:: O&f .LI::::I

4 3)- ;-
( breach of contract caused the Defendant's to loose money on the
I
v,

Toronto concert compared to what could have been made.

I:I
15. The Defendants plead and the fact is that this claim should be
I
dismissed against them with costs on a complete indemnity basis. I
i

I
COUNTER CLAIM I
l

1ft The Defendants claim:

(a) Damages of $200,000.00

I
!

I
(b) Prejudgment and post judgment Interest i! .
}
(c) Accounting
I
(d) Costs on a complete Indemnity scale I
\

(9) Such and other relief that counsel may advise and that court
I
I
!
~
allow.

17. The Defendants repeat the allegations set out in the

Statement of Defence.

18. The Defendants plead and the fact is that the Plaintiffwas negHgent
in the performance of her duty and as a result. the Defendants II
suffered damages for the concerts did not make as much money as I
!
expected if the organization

not negligent and haphazard.

and management by the Plaintiff was
I
I
I-
I
I
I
I
 ,o;..;,cc: c"'tJ.~ r.o~ r
!
I
i
5
r: i
19. The Defendants plead and the fact is that the PlaintIff presented
herself as being an expert in tour management and Defendants
relied on her to their economiC detriment.
I
I

I
20. The Defendants plead and fact Is that the Plaintiff breached her I
contract with the Defendants thereby causing damages to them. I
I
Dated at Mississauga this 26th day of January 2009

Gordon Ziatko Bobesich

Barrister-at-Law
10 Kingsbridge Garden CirCle
i
Suite 704
Mississauga, Ontario
I
L5R 3K6
I
I
I,
Tel: 905-502-3497
Fax: 905-502-3461
!
I
Solicitor for the Defendant(s) II
.TO: Brauti Thorning Zibarras
Barristers and Solicitors
151 Vonge Street
I
Suite 1800 I~
Toronto, Ontario M5C 2W7

P. James Zibarras
I
i
LSUC#: 48856F I
I

Tel.: 416 362-6528

I
i
Fax: 416362-8410

Solicitor for the Plaintiff r

1

II
I
!
!r