Robichaud v. Royal Bank of Canada
The motion judge correctly applied the established principles on dismissal for delay, found the delay to be inordinate and that a presumption of prejudice arose, the appellants offered no evidence to explain the delay, and consequently the action was properly dismissed; the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- C43482
- Parties
- Appellant: Laura Robichaud; Appellant: Harvey Woods Hosiery Inc.; Respondent: Royal Bank of Canada; Respondent: PricewaterhouseCoopers Inc.
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 19 October 2005
- Procedural Posture
- Collection / Appeal From Motion Judge's Order Dismissing Action for Delay (motion to Dismiss)
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Delay, Presumption of Prejudice, Burden to Explain Delay, 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
Laura Robichaud
Appellant
Harvey Woods Hosiery Inc.
Appellant
Royal Bank of Canada
Respondent
PricewaterhouseCoopers Inc.
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Collection / Appeal From Motion Judge's Order Dismissing Action for Delay (motion to Dismiss)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the action should be dismissed for delay
- 2 Whether the delay was inordinate and gave rise to a presumption of prejudice
- 3 Whether the appellants provided an adequate explanation for the delay
Ratio Decidendi
The motion judge correctly applied the established principles on dismissal for delay, found the delay to be inordinate and that a presumption of prejudice arose, the appellants offered no evidence to explain the delay, and consequently the action was properly dismissed; the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and upheld the motion judge's findings.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appeal dismissed with costs.
- Costs fixed in the total sum of $18,456.00 in favour of PricewaterhouseCoopers Inc.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Robichaud v. Royal Bank of Canada Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2005-10-19 Docket numbers C43482 Judges Catzman, Marvin Adrian; Blair, Robert Ashley; Rouleau, Paul S. Subject Civil Decision Content DATE: 20051019 DOCKET: C43482 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO RE: LAURA ROBICHAUD and HARVEY WOODS HOSIERY INC. (Plaintiffs (Appellants)) – and – ROYAL BANK OF CANADA and PRICE WATERHOUSE LIMITED (Defendants (Respondents)) BEFORE: CATZMAN, BLAIR and ROULEAU JJ.A. COUNSEL: James C. Morton for the appellant Benjamin Frydenberg for PricewaterhouseCoopers Inc. Helen C. Walsh for Royal Bank of Canada HEARD & ENDORSED: October 17, 2005 On appeal from Justice R. J. Haines of the Superior Court of Justice dated April 6, 2005. APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT [1] Counsel for the appellants fairly presented the position of his clients. But we are all of the view that these appeals must fail. Counsel acknowledges that the motion judge correctly stated the principles applicable to the motion to dismiss this action for delay. It was open to him to conclude, as he did, that the delay was inordinate, that a presumption of prejudice arose and that, in the absence of any evidence from the appellants to explain the delay, the action should be dismissed. We are not persuaded that there is any basis on which to disturb the motion judge’s findings. [2] The appeal is dismissed with costs, fixed in the total sum of $18,456.00 in favour of PricewaterhouseCoopers and in the total sum of $11,590.86 in favour of Royal Bank of Canada. The amounts paid into court as security are to be paid out to each of the respondents in the amounts paid in to the credit of each of them.