Royal Bank of Canada v. Lukezic
The trial judge found no evidence that the appellant’s consent to the receivership was obtained by fraud nor that the consent was conditioned on a $150,000 advance; there was no basis for the Court of Appeal to overturn those findings, therefore the appeal was dismissed and costs awarded.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2011 ONCA 314
- Parties
- Respondent: Royal Bank of Canada; Appellant: James Joseph Lukezic; Appellant: Walker Hall Winery Ltd.; Appellant: Lukezic Group Ltd.; Appellant: Walker Hall Group Ltd.; Receiver: BDO Canada Limited
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 20 April 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Collection / Appeal
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Receivership, Consent to Receivership, Fraud, Costs
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Royal Bank of Canada
Respondent
James Joseph Lukezic
Appellant
Walker Hall Winery Ltd.
Appellant
Lukezic Group Ltd.
Appellant
Walker Hall Group Ltd.
Appellant
BDO Canada Limited
Receiver
Procedural Posture
Collection / Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellant’s consent to the receivership order was obtained through fraud
- 2 Whether the appellant’s consent was conditioned on an advance of $150,000
- 3 Whether the appellate court should interfere with the trial judge’s findings of fact
Ratio Decidendi
The trial judge found no evidence that the appellant’s consent to the receivership was obtained by fraud nor that the consent was conditioned on a $150,000 advance; there was no basis for the Court of Appeal to overturn those findings, therefore the appeal was dismissed and costs awarded.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Costs to the Bank of $3,000
- Costs to the receiver of $500
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Royal Bank of Canada v. Lukezic Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2011-04-20 Neutral citation 2011 ONCA 314 Docket numbers C52487 Judges Goudge, Stephen Thomas; Gillese, Eileen E.; Watt, David Subject Civil Decision Content CITATION: Royal Bank of Canada v. Lukezic, 2011 ONCA 314 DATE: 20110420 DOCKET: C52487 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO Goudge, Gillese and Watt JJ.A. BETWEEN Royal Bank of Canada Respondent and James Joseph Lukezic, Walker Hall Winery Ltd., Lukezic Group Ltd. and Walker Hall Group Ltd. Appellant James Joseph Lukezic, acting in person Milton A. Davis, for the respondent Robert J. Van Kessell, for BDO Canada Limited, the receiver Heard: April 19, 2011 On appeal from the judgment of Justice Geoffrey B. Morawetz of the Superior Court of Justice dated July 30, 2010. APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT [1] In our view, Morawetz J. accorded the appellant a very full and fair hearing. He could find no basis on the material before him to conclude that the appellant’s consent to the receivership order was obtained through fraud. Nor was there evidence, at least before him, of the consent being conditioned on an advance of $150,000, although that issue may well be the subject of the appellant’s action against his former lawyer. We can see no basis for interfering with these findings and as a consequence the appeal must be dismissed. Costs to the Bank of $3,000 and to the receiver of $500.