St-Amand v. Eldorado Corp. Ltd.

St-Amand v. Eldorado Corp. Ltd.

The application to vary or discharge the chambers order was dismissed because the appellant failed to establish proper service of the writ and statement of claim and the record showed the statement of defence had been filed within the permitted time, rendering the proposed appeals unarguable and justifying refusal of relief and indigent status to pursue those appeals.

Citation
2000 BCCA 572
Parties
Plaintiff (appellant): Jacques St-Amand; Defendant (respondent): Eldorado Corp. Ltd.; Defendant (respondent): Jordan Dev. Corp. Ltd.; Defendant (respondent): Joseph Leblanc
Court
British Columbia Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
24 October 2000
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal/application Under Court of Appeal Act S.9(6) to Discharge or Vary Chambers Order / Chambers Application to Vary/discharge Prior Chambers Orders and to Obtain Indigent Status to Pursue Appeal
Outcome
Application dismissed; order of Madam Justice Saunders dated July 21, 2000 upheld; no variation granted
Legal Topics
Service of Process, Default Judgment, Indigent Status for Appeal, Timeliness of Defence Filing, Dismissal for Lack of Merit
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Property/tenancy Law Appeals Service of Process Default Judgment Indigent Status for Appeal Timeliness of Defence Filing Dismissal for Lack of Merit

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jacques St-Amand

Plaintiff (appellant)

Eldorado Corp. Ltd.

Defendant (respondent)

Jordan Dev. Corp. Ltd.

Defendant (respondent)

Joseph Leblanc

Defendant (respondent)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal/application Under Court of Appeal Act S.9(6) to Discharge or Vary Chambers Order / Chambers Application to Vary/discharge Prior Chambers Orders and to Obtain Indigent Status to Pursue Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the writ of summons and statement of claim were properly served
  2. 2 Whether the statement of defence was filed within the permitted time
  3. 3 Whether a default judgment (setting aside defence) was warranted

Ratio Decidendi

The application to vary or discharge the chambers order was dismissed because the appellant failed to establish proper service of the writ and statement of claim and the record showed the statement of defence had been filed within the permitted time, rendering the proposed appeals unarguable and justifying refusal of relief and indigent status to pursue those appeals.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; order of Madam Justice Saunders dated July 21, 2000 upheld; no variation granted

Orders

  • Application to vary or discharge the July 21, 2000 chambers order dismissed
  • Order of Madam Justice Saunders dated July 21, 2000 upheld