Yes, this case resulted in the court dismissing the minority oppression claims. The court found that the plaintiff, as a minority shareholder, failed to establish that there was any oppression or disregard for his interests that would warrant relief under the relevant statutory provisions. The court emphasized that mere disagreements or dissatisfaction with management decisions do not constitute oppression unless there is clear evidence of actual oppressive conduct or a visible departure from fair dealing standards. Additionally, the court noted that the plaintiff did not come with clean hands, having engaged in breaches of fiduciary duties and other misconduct, which further undermined his claims (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) . As a result, the application for relief under oppression was dismissed with costs.