Fanshawe College of Applied Arts and Technology v. AU Optronics Corporation

Fanshawe College of Applied Arts and Technology v. AU Optronics Corporation

The appeal is quashed because the moving party expressly conceded the order below is interlocutory and will not rely on res judicata in respect of s.36(4) or abuse of process, leaving no final adjudicable order for appeal.

Citation
2015 ONCA 808
Parties
Moving Party (respondent): Fanshawe College of Applied Arts and Technology; Responding Party (appellant): AU Optronics Corporation; Responding Party (appellant): Chi Mei Corporation; Responding Party (appellant): Chi Mei Optoelectronics Corporation; Responding Party (appellant): Nexgen Mediatech Inc.; Responding Party (appellant): HannStar Display Corporation
Court
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
24 November 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal From Motion Ruling / Motion to Quash Appeal (motion to Quash Pending Appeal From Interlocutory Order)
Outcome
Appeal quashed on basis that the order below is interlocutory by concession of moving party
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Interlocutory Vs Final Order, Res Judicata, Abuse of Process, Costs
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Appellate Procedure Competition Law Summary Judgment Interlocutory Vs Final Order Res Judicata Abuse of Process Costs

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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fanshawe College of Applied Arts and Technology

Moving Party (respondent)

AU Optronics Corporation

Responding Party (appellant)

Chi Mei Corporation

Responding Party (appellant)

Chi Mei Optoelectronics Corporation

Responding Party (appellant)

Nexgen Mediatech Inc.

Responding Party (appellant)

HannStar Display Corporation

Responding Party (appellant)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal From Motion Ruling / Motion to Quash Appeal (motion to Quash Pending Appeal From Interlocutory Order)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the order below is final or interlocutory (dismissing a summary judgment motion)
  2. 2 Whether the moving party may assert res judicata in relation to s.36(4) of the Competition Act or abuse of process
  3. 3 Entitlement to costs for the motion to quash

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is quashed because the moving party expressly conceded the order below is interlocutory and will not rely on res judicata in respect of s.36(4) or abuse of process, leaving no final adjudicable order for appeal.

Court Disposition

Appeal quashed on basis that the order below is interlocutory by concession of moving party

Orders

  • Appeal quashed
  • Moving party awarded costs of this motion fixed at $2,500 inclusive of disbursements and taxes