Istuary CEO denies being in complete control of companies, asks court to remove certificates of pending litigation on homes

By ThinkPol Staff

The CEO of a once high flying Vancouver tech incubator that went down in flames leaving employees and investors high and dry has is claiming that he has never been in complete control of the company, and, in an amended court filing, is seeking to remove certificates of pending litigation filed against homes owned by him and his wife.

Yi’an Sun, also known as Ethan Sun, who’s allegedly on the run in China according to another lawsuit[1]S 177665 CARANGI, Joe v ISTUARY INNOVATION FUND 1 LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, is also denying that Istuary was ever a “scam” or a Ponzi scheme that guaranteed five-fold return on the principal invested within two years, according to the amended response to civil claim filed last week[2]S 177974 JIA, Bo v SUN, Yi .

Sun, who had strong support from former Premier Christy Clark’s BC Liberal government, while admitting to being the president of Istuary Labs and a director of Istuary Labs and Istuary Holdings, denies being a “promotor of investments” in any of the companies.

Sun, claims that he “did not at the material times not at the material times have complete and absolute control over Istuary Labs, Istuary Holdings’ and Network Intelligence accounting corporate and business records” and that he was “not at the material times the sole director” of those companies.

Sun’s wife Yulan Hu, also known as Amy Hu, claims that she “is not and was not at the material times a director, officer, or employee” of any of the companies named as defendants in the lawsuit and that she did not “assist” Mr. Sun or his companies in connection with the plaintiffs in the case.

Labelling it an “abuse of process”, Sun and Hu is seeking the removal of certificates of pending litigation against their multimillion-dollar properties, which they deny being funded through money allegedly siphoned off from Istuary.

British Columbia’s Director of Employment Standards has determined that the companies have contravened the Employment Standards Act and the 157 employees are all entitled to more than $2.9 million in wages and interest, and has indicated that money from the sale of the director’s properties would be used to payback the workers[3]

References   [ + ]

2. S 177974 JIA, Bo v SUN, Yi