May 15, 2018
Kasirer, Schrager, Mainville
Application for leave to appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court. Dismissed.
Under arts. 139, 352 and 357 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CQLR, c. C-25.01), applications for leave to appeal must be served by bailiff upon the respondent. This was not done here, however, as the application was instead served on counsel, as allowed under the initial order. In circumstances where an appeal under ss. 13 and 14 of the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (R.S.C. 1985, c. C-36) is regulated “as far as possible” according to the practice of the court appealed to, and where the initial order in the case contained a conclusion requesting the aid of other courts to give effect to the order, service could be made according to the terms of that order.
However, the application did not satisfy the criteria governing an application for leave to appeal because it essentially asked the Court to examine the trial judge’s interpretation of the terms of a specific contract, in this instance a mining lease.
An RSS feed allows you to keep up to date with any recent updates published on a website. By subcribing to our RSS feed, you will automatically receive the latest news related to your RSS feed and view them at any time.