Li v. Piao

Li v. Piao

Section 1 of the Court Order Interest Act requires prejudgment interest on pecuniary judgments; the court therefore ordered prejudgment interest on the damages for breaches of the Li Agreement and the Tianjin Agreement and fixed the dates the causes of action arose as July 31, 2015 (Li Agreement) and July 29, 2015 (Tianjin Agreement) for calculation purposes.

Citation
2019 BCSC 683
Parties
Plaintiff and Defendant by Counterclaim: Da Bei Li (a.k.a. Dabei David Li; a.k.a. David Li); Defendant and Plaintiff by Counterclaim: Harry Piao; Defendant and Plaintiff by Counterclaim: Top Car Seller Inc.; Defendant and Third Party: Tianjin East China International Trade Co. Ltd.; Defendant and Third Party: Qun Wang; Defendant and Third Party: Maxblue Enterprises Ltd.; Third Party: Xue Zhi Wang; Third Party: Yu Cheng Jia; Third Party: Jie Jia; Third Party: Hao Qu
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
2 May 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Contractual Disputes and Counterclaims / Supplemental Reasons for Judgment on Interest (post Trial)
Outcome
Interest ordered pursuant to the Court Order Interest Act added to pecuniary judgments; dates for causes of action fixed for interest calculation.
Legal Topics
Prejudgment Interest, Cause of Action Date, Court Order Interest Act
Source Language
English
Contract Civil Procedure Remedies Interest Prejudgment Interest Cause of Action Date Court Order Interest Act

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Da Bei Li (a.k.a. Dabei David Li; a.k.a. David Li)

Plaintiff and Defendant by Counterclaim

Harry Piao

Defendant and Plaintiff by Counterclaim

Top Car Seller Inc.

Defendant and Plaintiff by Counterclaim

Tianjin East China International Trade Co. Ltd.

Defendant and Third Party

Qun Wang

Defendant and Third Party

Maxblue Enterprises Ltd.

Defendant and Third Party

Xue Zhi Wang

Third Party

Yu Cheng Jia

Third Party

Jie Jia

Third Party

Hao Qu

Third Party

Procedural Posture

Civil Contractual Disputes and Counterclaims / Supplemental Reasons for Judgment on Interest (post Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prejudgment interest must be added under the Court Order Interest Act
  2. 2 What date to use as the date the cause of action arose for interest calculation for the Li Agreement and the Tianjin Agreement

Ratio Decidendi

Section 1 of the Court Order Interest Act requires prejudgment interest on pecuniary judgments; the court therefore ordered prejudgment interest on the damages for breaches of the Li Agreement and the Tianjin Agreement and fixed the dates the causes of action arose as July 31, 2015 (Li Agreement) and July 29, 2015 (Tianjin Agreement) for calculation purposes.

Court Disposition

Interest ordered pursuant to the Court Order Interest Act added to pecuniary judgments; dates for causes of action fixed for interest calculation.

Orders

  • Interest pursuant to the prejudgment interest rates set by the court will be added to the damage awards flowing from the breaches of the Li Agreement and the Tianjin Agreement.
  • For the purposes of the calculation of interest the court finds the cause of action arose on July 31, 2015 for the Li Agreement and on July 29, 2015 for the Tianjin Agreement.