1163499 B.C. Ltd. v. Yao

1163499 B.C. Ltd. v. Yao

The Court has jurisdiction to hear the appeal without a prior reconsideration application but may exercise discretion to require reconsideration; ordinary service in compliance with the Rules suffices and actual notice is not required; Rule 3-8(11) authorizes setting aside default judgments even after damages have been assessed and the Miracle Feeds test applies; the chambers judge did not commit a palpable and overriding error warranting intervention, so the appeal is dismissed and the Set Aside Order is upheld.

Citation
2025 BCCA 443
Parties
Appellant (plaintiff): 1163499 B.C. Ltd.; Respondent (defendant): Dong Sheng Yao
Court
British Columbia Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
12 December 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal From Supreme Court of British Columbia / Appeal Heard and Judgment Rendered by Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Setting Aside Default Judgment, Miracle Feeds Test, Reconsideration Under Rule 22 1(3), Ordinary Service Vs Actual Notice, Inherent Jurisdiction to Set Aside Judgments, Standard of Review (palpable and Overriding Error)
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Appeals Default Judgment Service of Process Court Rules Setting Aside Default Judgment Miracle Feeds Test Reconsideration Under Rule 22 1(3) +3 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 28 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

1163499 B.C. Ltd.

Appellant (plaintiff)

Dong Sheng Yao

Respondent (defendant)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal From Supreme Court of British Columbia / Appeal Heard and Judgment Rendered by Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court of Appeal has jurisdiction to hear an appeal where no reconsideration application under R.22-1(3) was brought
  2. 2 Whether ordinary service (mail) satisfied notice requirements or actual notice was required
  3. 3 Whether the Miracle Feeds test applies to applications to set aside default judgments after damages have been assessed

Ratio Decidendi

The Court has jurisdiction to hear the appeal without a prior reconsideration application but may exercise discretion to require reconsideration; ordinary service in compliance with the Rules suffices and actual notice is not required; Rule 3-8(11) authorizes setting aside default judgments even after damages have been assessed and the Miracle Feeds test applies; the chambers judge did not commit a palpable and overriding error warranting intervention, so the appeal is dismissed and the Set Aside Order is upheld.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed and Set Aside Order upheld