Lakeland Bank v. The Ship "Never E Nuff"

Lakeland Bank v. The Ship "Never E Nuff"

The motion for summary judgment was dismissed because the plaintiff failed to properly prove and exemplify the foreign U.S. judgment and related instruments before this Court, and there exist genuine disputes of fact and law—including ownership, registration of security and the interplay between Maritime Law and the Civil Code of Québec—that render the matter unfit for summary disposition.

Citation
2013 FC 864
Parties
Plaintiff/cross Defendant: Lakeland Bank; Defendant/plaintiff in Warranty: The Ship "Never E Nuff" (Hull No. DNAZ8012C303); Defendant/cross Plaintiff: Patrick Salvail Saint‑Germain; Defendant/cross Plaintiff: Location Holand (1995) Ltée; Defendant: Breen P. McMahon
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
12 August 2013
Procedural Posture
Admiralty Action in Rem and in Personam / Motion for Summary Judgment (rule 213)
Outcome
Motion for summary judgment dismissed
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Maritime Lien/ship Mortgage, Enforcement of Foreign Judgment, Admissibility of Foreign Court Records, Application of Civil Code of Québec Vs Maritime Law
Source Language
English
Admiralty and Maritime Law Civil Procedure Conflict of Laws/enforcement of Foreign Judgments Summary Judgment Maritime Lien/ship Mortgage Enforcement of Foreign Judgment Admissibility of Foreign Court Records Application of Civil Code of Québec Vs Maritime Law

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lakeland Bank

Plaintiff/cross Defendant

The Ship "Never E Nuff" (Hull No. DNAZ8012C303)

Defendant/plaintiff in Warranty

Patrick Salvail Saint‑Germain

Defendant/cross Plaintiff

Location Holand (1995) Ltée

Defendant/cross Plaintiff

Breen P. McMahon

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Admiralty Action in Rem and in Personam / Motion for Summary Judgment (rule 213)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff has a clear in rem right to the vessel warranting summary judgment
  2. 2 Whether a foreign judgment obtained in the United States can be enforced in Canada without exemplification and proper proof
  3. 3 Whether Maritime Law displaces the application of the Civil Code of Québec and affects registration/priority issues

Ratio Decidendi

The motion for summary judgment was dismissed because the plaintiff failed to properly prove and exemplify the foreign U.S. judgment and related instruments before this Court, and there exist genuine disputes of fact and law—including ownership, registration of security and the interplay between Maritime Law and the Civil Code of Québec—that render the matter unfit for summary disposition.

Court Disposition

Motion for summary judgment dismissed

Orders

  • Motion for summary judgment dismissed
  • Costs awarded to defendants Location Holand (1995) Ltée and Patrick Salvail Saint‑Germain