Canada Steamship Lines Inc. v. Elliott

Canada Steamship Lines Inc. v. Elliott

The motions were dismissed because it was not plain and obvious that the counterclaim disclosed no reasonable cause of action: the counterclaim, read with particulars, sufficiently pleaded the three elements of the intentional interference tort (intent to injure, illegal means interfering with business, and economic loss) and adequately pleaded conspiracy and specific unlawful acts; the narrower inducing‑breach test was not the sole applicable standard and therefore the strike‑out motions failed.

Citation
2006 FC 609
Parties
Plaintiff/defendant by Counterclaim: Canada Steamship Lines Inc.; Defendant: Kenneth Wayne Elliott; Defendant/plaintiff by Counterclaim: Voyageur Marine Transport Limited; Defendant/plaintiff by Counterclaim: Fred Huneault; Defendant: Vessel Trading Corp.; Defendant: Sugarloaf Maritime Inc.; Defendant by Counterclaim: Seafarers' International Union of Canada; Defendant by Counterclaim: Roman Gralewicz
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
17 May 2006
Procedural Posture
Admiralty Action in Personam / Motions Under Federal Courts Rules R.221(1) to Strike Counterclaim
Outcome
Motions to strike the counterclaim dismissed
Legal Topics
Intentional Interference With Contractual Relations, Inducing Breach of Contract, Strike‑out of Pleadings, Conspiracy, Joinder Under Rule 191(1)
Source Language
English
Admiralty Law Torts Civil Procedure Labour Law Intentional Interference With Contractual Relations Inducing Breach of Contract Strike‑out of Pleadings Conspiracy +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 5 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Canada Steamship Lines Inc.

Plaintiff/defendant by Counterclaim

Kenneth Wayne Elliott

Defendant

Voyageur Marine Transport Limited

Defendant/plaintiff by Counterclaim

Fred Huneault

Defendant/plaintiff by Counterclaim

Vessel Trading Corp.

Defendant

Sugarloaf Maritime Inc.

Defendant

Seafarers' International Union of Canada

Defendant by Counterclaim

Roman Gralewicz

Defendant by Counterclaim

Procedural Posture

Admiralty Action in Personam / Motions Under Federal Courts Rules R.221(1) to Strike Counterclaim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the counterclaim discloses a reasonable cause of action for the tort of intentional interference with contractual relations
  2. 2 Whether the narrower tort of inducing breach of contract is the applicable test
  3. 3 Whether the counterclaim adequately pleads intent, use of illegal means and economic loss under the three‑element test (WestJet/Daishowa)

Ratio Decidendi

The motions were dismissed because it was not plain and obvious that the counterclaim disclosed no reasonable cause of action: the counterclaim, read with particulars, sufficiently pleaded the three elements of the intentional interference tort (intent to injure, illegal means interfering with business, and economic loss) and adequately pleaded conspiracy and specific unlawful acts; the narrower inducing‑breach test was not the sole applicable standard and therefore the strike‑out motions failed.

Court Disposition

Motions to strike the counterclaim dismissed

Orders

  • Motions by Canada Steamship Lines Inc., Seafarers' International Union and Roman Gralewicz to strike the counterclaim are dismissed with costs
  • Canada Steamship Lines Inc. to serve and file its Response and Defence to the Counterclaim on or before June 6, 2006