C & R Sterling Farm Ltd. v. Sierra Forestry Inc.

C & R Sterling Farm Ltd. v. Sierra Forestry Inc.

The attachment order was terminated because the plaintiff failed to establish, on the required evidentiary basis, any of the statutory or rule‑based grounds for a pre‑judgment attachment; mere suspicion and uncorroborated assertions (including reliance on an online registration notation and background allegations) do not satisfy the strict factual showing required, and there was no principled basis to pierce the corporate veil.

Citation
2010 NSSC 154
Parties
Applicant/defendant: C & R Sterling Farm Limited; Applicant/defendant: Richard Scott Sterling; Respondent/plaintiff: Sierra Forestry Inc.
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
19 April 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Contract; Attachment Motion / Interlocutory Motion (termination of Attachment and Venue Change)
Outcome
Attachment order terminated; main action to be tried in Windsor (Hants County); interlocutory applications to continue in Halifax; costs awarded to applicant.
Legal Topics
Attachment Order, Pre Judgment Remedy, Piercing the Corporate Veil, Change of Venue, Rectification, Frustration of Contract, Costs
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Contract Law Corporate Law Property Law Attachment Order Pre Judgment Remedy Piercing the Corporate Veil Change of Venue +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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

C & R Sterling Farm Limited

Applicant/defendant

Richard Scott Sterling

Applicant/defendant

Sierra Forestry Inc.

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil Contract; Attachment Motion / Interlocutory Motion (termination of Attachment and Venue Change)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pre-judgment attachment order should be terminated for delay or because it is not required to secure the plaintiff
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff established grounds under the governing rules for an attachment order (intent to hinder creditors, transfer of assets, evasion of service, residency concerns)
  3. 3 Whether the corporate veil should be pierced to treat the individual and corporate defendants as one

Ratio Decidendi

The attachment order was terminated because the plaintiff failed to establish, on the required evidentiary basis, any of the statutory or rule‑based grounds for a pre‑judgment attachment; mere suspicion and uncorroborated assertions (including reliance on an online registration notation and background allegations) do not satisfy the strict factual showing required, and there was no principled basis to pierce the corporate veil.

Court Disposition

Attachment order terminated; main action to be tried in Windsor (Hants County); interlocutory applications to continue in Halifax; costs awarded to applicant.

Orders

  • Attachment order dated November 21, 2007 terminated as against C & R Sterling Farm Limited
  • Place of trial changed to Windsor, Hants County; interlocutory applications to continue to be heard in Halifax