Whyte v. Sandpiper VI (The)

Whyte v. Sandpiper VI (The)

Prothonotary found the plaintiff had established a prima facie case that the pipeline formed part of the arrested dredge's equipment and had been rented and moved; accordingly a show cause order for contempt is appropriate to determine the matter at a judge hearing; amendment to the Statement of Claim granted; show cause returnable March 25, 2002; costs in the cause.

Citation
2002 FCT 271
Parties
Plaintiff: Donald James Whyte; Defendant (individual Owner): Edward Maskall; Defendant (vessel Owners): The Owners, Dredge "Sandpiper VI" and equipment; Defendant (corporate Owner): Island Dredging Corp.; Defendant (corporate Owner): Island Sand Piping Corp. (formerly Island Sand Sales Ltd.); Third Party (alleged Renter/custodian of Pipeline): Fraser River Pile & Dredge
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
11 March 2002
Procedural Posture
Admiralty Arrest (in Rem) / Show Cause Application (pre Contempt Hearing)
Outcome
Show cause order issued; amendment to Statement of Claim granted; matter set for contempt hearing; costs in the cause.
Legal Topics
Ship Arrest, Equipment Arrest, Contempt, Show Cause Order, Amendment of Statement of Claim, Rental of Arrested Equipment
Source Language
English
Admiralty and Maritime Law Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Ship Arrest Equipment Arrest Contempt Show Cause Order Amendment of Statement of Claim +1 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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Donald James Whyte

Plaintiff

Edward Maskall

Defendant (individual Owner)

The Owners, Dredge "Sandpiper VI" and equipment

Defendant (vessel Owners)

Island Dredging Corp.

Defendant (corporate Owner)

Island Sand Piping Corp. (formerly Island Sand Sales Ltd.)

Defendant (corporate Owner)

Fraser River Pile & Dredge

Third Party (alleged Renter/custodian of Pipeline)

Procedural Posture

Admiralty Arrest (in Rem) / Show Cause Application (pre Contempt Hearing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the rental and movement of the dredge spoils pipeline constituted a breach of an arrest warrant
  2. 2 Whether there is a prima facie case to issue a show cause order leading to a contempt hearing
  3. 3 Scope of an arrest warrant to include equipment detached from a vessel

Ratio Decidendi

Prothonotary found the plaintiff had established a prima facie case that the pipeline formed part of the arrested dredge's equipment and had been rented and moved; accordingly a show cause order for contempt is appropriate to determine the matter at a judge hearing; amendment to the Statement of Claim granted; show cause returnable March 25, 2002; costs in the cause.

Court Disposition

Show cause order issued; amendment to Statement of Claim granted; matter set for contempt hearing; costs in the cause.

Orders

  • Amendment to Statement of Claim granted to correct mechanical error in damages accounting
  • Show cause order issued, returnable 25 March 2002