Research in Motion Limited v. Visto Corporation

Research in Motion Limited v. Visto Corporation

The court will enter the agreed operative part of the consent judgment (paragraphs 1–5), adjusted the contested preamble to a concise factual recital, and decline to award costs because the dispute over the preamble constituted needless controversy and overpapering.

Citation
2008 FC 641
Parties
Plaintiff (defendant by Counterclaim): Research In Motion Limited; Defendant (plaintiff by Counterclaim): Visto Corporation
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 May 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil / Motion for Judgment in Writing Under Federal Courts Rules, Rule 369 (consent Judgment Dispute Pre Trial)
Outcome
Judgment issued pursuant to Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment; operative paragraphs 1–5 agreed and entered; court adjusted the preamble; no costs awarded on the motion.
Legal Topics
Consent Judgment, Preamble, Settlement, Costs, Overpapering
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Commercial Litigation Consent Judgment Preamble Settlement Costs Overpapering

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 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Research In Motion Limited

Plaintiff (defendant by Counterclaim)

Visto Corporation

Defendant (plaintiff by Counterclaim)

Procedural Posture

Civil / Motion for Judgment in Writing Under Federal Courts Rules, Rule 369 (consent Judgment Dispute Pre Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should enter judgment on the parties' agreed operative terms despite lack of agreement on the preamble
  2. 2 Whether the preamble to a judgment is operative or merely a factual recital and thus material to the parties' rights
  3. 3 Whether costs should be awarded for contested drafting and overpapering of the file

Ratio Decidendi

The court will enter the agreed operative part of the consent judgment (paragraphs 1–5), adjusted the contested preamble to a concise factual recital, and decline to award costs because the dispute over the preamble constituted needless controversy and overpapering.

Court Disposition

Judgment issued pursuant to Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment; operative paragraphs 1–5 agreed and entered; court adjusted the preamble; no costs awarded on the motion.

Orders

  • Judgment granted in accordance with the agreed operative terms (paragraphs 1–5).
  • Court revised the preamble to a concise factual recital as reflected in these Reasons for Judgment.