Bendzak v. Bohnet, (2013) 339 B.C.A.C. 154 (CA)

• Judge: Lowry, J.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
• Case Date: May 28, 2013
• Jurisdiction: British Columbia
• Citations: (2013), 339 B.C.A.C. 154 (CA);2013 BCCA 275

Bendzak v. Bohnet (2013), 339 B.C.A.C. 154 (CA);

    578 W.A.C. 154

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2013] B.C.A.C. TBEd. JN.034

Tanner Joseph Bendzak (respondent/plaintiff) v. Floyd Winston Bohnet and Julie Christine Bohnet (appellants/defendants)

(CA040596; 2013 BCCA 275)

Indexed As: Bendzak v. Bohnet

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Lowry, J.A.

June 12, 2013.

Summary:

The Bohnets were found liable as the owners and occupiers of property for injuries suffered by Bendzak (see [2013] B.C.T.C. Uned. 435). The Bohnets appealed. Two weeks after their factum was due, the Bohnets applied for an order extending the time for filing the factum. Bendzak opposed the motion on the ground that the appeal lacked merit.

The British Columbia Court of Appeal, per Lowry, J.A., concluded that the appeal had merit and granted an extension of time. The court also reviewed the conflicting case law on whether a single justice sitting in chambers had jurisdiction to deny an extension on the basis that the appeal lacked merit.

Courts - Topic 2110

Jurisdiction - Appellate jurisdiction - Single appellate judge - See paragraphs 1 to 13.

Practice - Topic 8862

Appeals - Quashing or dismissal of appeals - Grounds for - Lack of merit - Jurisdiction - See paragraphs 1 to 13.

Practice - Topic 9454.1

Appeals - Factums - Case on appeal or appeal book - Extension of time for filing - See paragraphs 1 to 13.

Cases Noticed:

Gonzalez v. Workers' Compensation Board (B.C.) et al., [2012] B.C.A.C. Uned. 13; 2012 BCCA 97, refd to. [para. 1].

Westsea Construction Ltd. et al. v. 0759553 B.C. Ltd. et al. (2013), 337 B.C.A.C. 162; 576 W.A.C. 162; 2013 BCCA 191, refd to. [para. 4].

Westsea Construction Ltd. et al. v. Veale et al. - see Westsea Construction Ltd. et al. v. 0759553 B.C. Ltd. et al.

Sekhon et al. v. Armstrong et al. (2003), 183 B.C.A.C. 137; 301 W.A.C. 137; 2003 BCCA 318, refd to. [para. 5].

Barta v. Canaccord Capital Corp. et al. (1997), 90 B.C.A.C. 282; 147 W.A.C. 282; 36 B.C.L.R.(3d) 81 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 6].

Dadashzadeh v. British Columbia et al. (2003), 188 B.C.A.C. 203; 308 W.A.C. 203; 2003 BCCA 463, refd to. [para. 7].

Garnons-Williams v. Latimer et al. (1994), 39 B.C.A.C. 29; 64 W.A.C. 29; 110 D.L.R.(4th) 578 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 7].

Carstensen v. Arbutus Manufacturing Ltd., [2003] B.C.A.C. Uned. 18; 2003 BCCA 88, refd to. [para. 8].

Nesbitt v. Neufeld, [2011] B.C.A.C. Uned. 84; 2011 BCCA 241, refd to. [para. 9].

Booty v. Hutton (2009), 264 B.C.A.C. 308; 445 W.A.C. 308; 2009 BCCA 29, refd to. [para. 9].

Kedia International Inc. et al. v. Royal Bank of Canada et al., [2008] B.C.A.C. Uned. 94; 2008 BCCA 305, refd to. [para. 9].

Salfinger v. Salfinger (2013), 337 B.C.A.C. 6; 576 W.A.C. 6; 2013 BCCA 217, refd to. [para. 9].

Baldwin v. Baldwin (2012), 320 B.C.A.C. 1; 543 W.A.C. 1; 2012 BCCA 116, refd to. [para. 9].

Cal Coast Spas Inc. v. Coast Spas Inc. et al., [2003] B.C.A.C. Uned. 187; 2003 BCCA 616, refd to. [para. 10].

Counsel:

C.L. Stewart, for the appellants;

G.J. Kehler, for the respondent.

This motion was heard in Chambers at Vancouver, British Columbia, on May 28, 2013, by Lowry, J.A., of the British Columbia Court of Appeal, who delivered the following reasons for judgment on June 12, 2013.