Black v. Ernst & Young Inc.

Black v. Ernst & Young Inc. Court Court of Appeal Date 1994-10-26 Citation 1994 NSCA 12 Docket CA 107528 Judge/Registrar/Adjudicator Pugsley, Ronald N. (Honourable Justice) Document Type Decision Decision Content Your browser's JavaScipt is disabled. Please download the PDF via the PDF icon. Cite as: Black v. Ernst & Young Inc., 1994 NSCA 12 C.A. No. 107528 MOYA SCotiA COUBI..OF AP...e.eAL BETWEEN: FREDERICK W. L BLACK ) The Appellant appeared ) in person Appellant ) ) ) ) -and­ ) ) ) Tim Hill ) for the Respondent ) ERNST &YOUNG INC., Trustee of the ) David G. Coles Estate of NsC Diesel Power Incorporated ) for ABN Amro Bank Canada ) ) Respondent ) Robert W. Wright. a.c. ) for Ersnt &Young. Inc. ) ) D. Bruce Clarke ) for the Superintendent ) in Bankruptcy ) ) Thomas M. MacDonald ) for Krupp Mak Maschinenbau ) Gmbh and Krupp Mal< ) Diesel Inc. ) ) Appeal Heard: ) OCtober 20. 1994 ) ) Judgment Delivered: ) October 26, 1994 ) ) ) BEFORE THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE RONALD N. PUGSLEY. IN CHAMBERS , . pUGSLEY, J,A,: (In Chambers) Frederick Black made application on OCtober 20, 1994 for an order nullifying: (1) A decision of this Court rendered April 9, 1992; (2) A decision of Roscoe J., of the Supreme Court rendered April 28, 1992; (3) A decision of Hall, J., of the Supreme Court delivered April 12, 1993; In addition, Mr. Black seeks a declaration that Ernst & Young, trustees of the bankrupt, NsC Diesel Power Inc., as well as its solicitors, breached their respective duties to "their clients and the estate of the bankrupt and its creditors-. After examining the material, and hearing submissions, from Mr. Black and counsel for the interested parties, I dismissed the motion, as there was no authority ~ demonstrating that I have Jurisdiction; further even if jurisdiction had been established, there is no evidence of any kind to support Mr. Black's contentions. I reserved the question of costs. Counsel for the interested parties in support of their submission for substantial costs argued strenuously that the motions were vexatious and frivolous, and were examples of a pattern of conduct carried out by Mr. Black since 1989. That conduct constituted an abuse of the Court process and caused great expense and inconvenience to their clients who were required to defend a multiplicity of motions which were meritless. Mr. Hill on behalf of the trustee, Ernst & Young Inc., referred to material placed before me by Mr.Black purportedly representing decisions made at a meeting of • , . ' 2 inspectors. Mr. Hill submitted that the material was false and detrimental to his clients. I was directed to the comments of Justice Hallett on behalf of this Court in ABM Bank Canada v. NsC Diesel Power Inc•• (1991). 101 N.S.A. (2d) 361at 362: the application was supported by the affidavit of Frederick W. L. Black. the president of the respondent company. That affidavit is noteworthy for its omission of relevant facts in the numerous paragraphs that contain ·contentions· of the deponent rather than setting out facts.· And again and p. 370: A review of these allegations is necessary to show the degree to which Mr. Black distorts the facts. Mr. Black denies that he was attempting to mislead the Court. I do not have sufficient information before me to come to a firm opinion respecting this particular issue. but I do conclude that counsel is justified in submitting that it is necessary to scrupulously read and examine all material filed by Mr. Black in support of any motion he makes to the Court. Mr. Black has submitted that costs should not be awarded against him personally because he is only acting in the capacity of an officer of the bankrupt in carrying out the duties imposed on him under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act. I do not accept this submission. and I award costs against Mr. Black personally to be paid forthwith in the amount of $400.00 to each n of the parties that appeared before me on this motion, except for Mr. Clarke appearing of the Superintendent. J.A.~I