AtlanticSpark Professional Services Inc. v. Hryshyna, 2016 NSSC 114

• Judge: Pickup, J.
• Court: Supreme Court of Nova Scotia (Canada)
• Case Date: March 15, 2016
• Jurisdiction: Nova Scotia
• Citations: 2016 NSSC 114;(2016), 373 N.S.R.(2d) 288 (SC)

AtlanticSpark Prof. v. Hryshyna (2016), 373 N.S.R.(2d) 288 (SC);

    1175 A.P.R. 288

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2016] N.S.R.(2d) TBEd. AP.053

AtlanticSpark Professional Services Inc. (applicant) v. Yauheniya Hryshyna (respondent)

(Hfx No. 445582; 2016 NSSC 114)

Indexed As: AtlanticSpark Professional Services Inc. v. Hryshyna

Nova Scotia Supreme Court

Pickup, J.

April 28, 2016.

Summary:

Hryshyna was hired as office manager at AtlanticSpark Professional Services Inc. on January 18, 2015 and was terminated on April 15, 2015. AtlanticSpark brought an application against Hryshyna, seeking an order for damages, return of property and other relief, alleging breach of contract, conversion and detinue of its property, fraudulent misrepresentation and deceit. Hryshyna moved for an order converting the application into an action pursuant to Civil Procedure Rule 6.

The Nova Scotia Supreme Court granted the motion.

Practice - Topic 2493

Writ of summons, endorsements, originating summons and originating notices - Originating notices - Conversion to or from formal action - [See Practice - Topic 3082 ].

Practice - Topic 3082

Applications and motions - Applications - Disposition - Application to proceed as action - Hryshyna was hired as office manager at AtlanticSpark Professional Services Inc. on January 18, 2015 and was terminated on April 15, 2015 - AtlanticSpark brought an application against Hryshyna, seeking an order for damages, return of property and other relief, alleging breach of contract, conversion and detinue of its property, fraudulent misrepresentation and deceit - Hryshyna moved for an order converting the application into an action pursuant to Civil Procedure Rule 6 - She submitted that the application process did not provide procedural safeguards necessary to permit her to make a full defence to these allegations - She alleged there were serious questions of credibility that were better assessed through an action - Moreover, she stated that she was not prepared to waive her right to a jury trial but could not make that election at this time because the details of the claims were not yet apparent - The Nova Scotia Supreme Court granted the motion - On balance the court was satisfied, because of the seriousness, complexity and wide-ranging allegations, and for the reasons outlined in its analysis of the three-stage test set out in Jeffrie v. Henriksen (2011 NSSC), that an order to convert this matter to an action would issue - The issues of credibility raised here, when combined with the nature of the allegations, militated strongly in favour of the procedural and evidentiary safeguards of the trial process.

Counsel:

John O'Neill, for the applicant;

Richard Norman and Deanna Bru, for the respondent.

This motion was heard on March 15, 2016, in Halifax, N.S., before Pickup, J., of the Nova Scotia Supreme Court, who delivered the following decision on April 28, 2016.