Allard v. Montalban

Allard v. Montalban

The application to extend time was refused because the short delay was insufficiently explained as a settled intention to appeal and the proposed appeal lacked merit because it rested on the trial judge's credibility and factual findings (delivery, partnership, sale versus gift) which are not to be interfered with absent unusual circumstances.

Citation
2000 BCCA 636
Parties
Plaintiff (respondent): Peter Andrew Allard; Plaintiff (respondent): PAC Chair International Inc.; Defendant (appellant): Shane Montalban; Defendant (appellant): James Baroux
Court
British Columbia Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
8 November 2000
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time to File and Serve Notice of Appeal / In Chambers Oral Reasons; Decision on Extension Application
Outcome
Application to extend time refused
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Notice of Appeal, Credibility Findings, Standard of Review, Delivery of Shares, Sale Vs Gift
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Appeal Evidence Contract Property (shares) Extension of Time Notice of Appeal Credibility Findings +3 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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Andrew Allard

Plaintiff (respondent)

PAC Chair International Inc.

Plaintiff (respondent)

Shane Montalban

Defendant (appellant)

James Baroux

Defendant (appellant)

Procedural Posture

Application for Extension of Time to File and Serve Notice of Appeal / In Chambers Oral Reasons; Decision on Extension Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to grant an extension of time to file and serve a notice of appeal
  2. 2 Whether the proposed appeal has sufficient merit to justify extension or is based on findings of credibility
  3. 3 Whether the trial judge's findings of delivery of shares, partnership and that the transaction was a sale rather than a gift can be disturbed on appeal

Ratio Decidendi

The application to extend time was refused because the short delay was insufficiently explained as a settled intention to appeal and the proposed appeal lacked merit because it rested on the trial judge's credibility and factual findings (delivery, partnership, sale versus gift) which are not to be interfered with absent unusual circumstances.

Court Disposition

Application to extend time refused

Orders

  • Application to extend the time to file and serve the notice of appeal is refused