C. Steven Sikes, Aquero, LLC v. Encana Corporation, Cenovus Fccl Ltd.

C. Steven Sikes, Aquero, LLC v. Encana Corporation, Cenovus Fccl Ltd.

The appeal is dismissed because the prothonotary did not err in finding no solicitor-client relationship existed, no confidential information was shown to have been provided that could be used to the appellants' prejudice, and the prothonotary's discretionary decision (including the costs award) was neither based on an error of principle nor plainly wrong given credibility findings and applicable standards of review.

Citation
2016 FC 671
Parties
Appellant/plaintiff: C. Steven Sikes; Appellant/plaintiff: Aquero, LLC; Appellant/plaintiff: Aquial, LLC; Respondent/defendant: Encana Corporation; Respondent/defendant: Cenovus FCCL Ltd.; Respondent/defendant: FCCL Partnership; Respondent/defendant: Cenovus Energy Inc.
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
16 June 2016
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Prothonotary's Interlocutory Order (motion to Remove Solicitors) / Interlocutory Appeal; Oral Reasons June 8, 2016; Judgment June 16, 2016
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; prothonotary's order upheld
Legal Topics
Disqualification of Counsel, Solicitor Client Relationship, Conflict of Interest Checks, Standard of Review for Interlocutory Orders, Costs Awards
Source Language
English
Intellectual Property Procedural Law Professional Responsibility Costs Disqualification of Counsel Solicitor Client Relationship Conflict of Interest Checks Standard of Review for Interlocutory Orders +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

C. Steven Sikes

Appellant/plaintiff

Aquero, LLC

Appellant/plaintiff

Aquial, LLC

Appellant/plaintiff

Encana Corporation

Respondent/defendant

Cenovus FCCL Ltd.

Respondent/defendant

FCCL Partnership

Respondent/defendant

Cenovus Energy Inc.

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Prothonotary's Interlocutory Order (motion to Remove Solicitors) / Interlocutory Appeal; Oral Reasons June 8, 2016; Judgment June 16, 2016

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a solicitor-client relationship was formed between Dr. Sikes and Mr. Garland/Smart & Biggar based on a June 2008 telephone call and follow up communications
  2. 2 Whether confidential information attributable to such a relationship was communicated to Mr. Garland
  3. 3 Whether any communicated confidential information could be used to the prejudice of the appellants

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the prothonotary did not err in finding no solicitor-client relationship existed, no confidential information was shown to have been provided that could be used to the appellants' prejudice, and the prothonotary's discretionary decision (including the costs award) was neither based on an error of principle nor plainly wrong given credibility findings and applicable standards of review.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; prothonotary's order upheld

Orders

  • The appellants' appeal from the Order of Prothonotary Lafrenière dated January 29, 2016 is dismissed.
  • The appellants shall jointly and severally pay costs to the respondents in the sum of $10,000 in any event of the cause.