Bank of Montreal v. Lysyk et al., 2003 ABQB 186

• Judge: Veit, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
• Case Date: February 21, 2003
• Citations: 2003 ABQB 186;(2003), 334 A.R. 308 (QB)

Bk. of Mtrl. v. Lysyk (2003), 334 A.R. 308 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2003] A.R. TBEd. MR.099

Bank of Montreal (plaintiff) v. Nicholas Edward Lysyk, Jennifer Gail Lysyk, Lillian Louise Green, Melanie Janine Dmytrow, Sheri L. Paquette, Darrell Armond Paquette, Stephanie Argue, Aneta Jakuszyk, Amanda Orr, Shannon MacMillan, 960881 Alberta Ltd., John Doe, Jane Doe, ABC Corporation and XYZ Corporation (defendants)

(Action No. 0203 15754; 2003 ABQB 186)

Indexed As: Bank of Montreal v. Lysyk et al.

Alberta Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial District of Edmonton

Veit, J.

February 25, 2003.

Summary:

Lysyk worked for the Bank of Montreal as a bank manager. The Bank sued Lysyk and numerous other defendants. The Bank al­leged that Lysyk stole $16,000,000 from the Bank and converted it to his own use and that the other defendants, inter alia, con­spired with Lysyk to defraud the Bank. The Bank sought summary trial of its action against Lysyk. Lysyk sought an adjournment of the summary trial application.

The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench dis­missed Lysyk's application for an ad­journ­ment and granted the Bank's applica­tion for a summary trial of its action against Lysyk.

Practice - Topic 5255.4

Trials - General - Summary trials - Avail­ability of - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench discussed what type of case was suitable for a summary trial - See para­graphs 40 to 49.

Practice - Topic 5255.4

Trials - General - Summary trials - Avail­ability of - Lysyk was a manager at a Bank - The Bank sued Lysyk, alleging that he stole $16,000,000 from the Bank and converted it to his own use - The Bank also sued numerous other defendants, al­leging, inter alia, that they conspired with Lysyk to defraud the Bank - The Bank sought summary trial of its action against Lysyk - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench allowed the application - Lysyk's defences were in the nature of contributory negligence by the Bank and of duress, blackmail or extortion by his co-defendants - The factual and legal issues respecting whether contributory negligence was a de­fence to a civil allegation of theft or fraud could conveniently and fairly be tried in a summary fashion - There was no reason to require the Bank to remain involved in proceedings whereby Lysyk claimed duress against his co-defendants.

Cases Noticed:

Indian Residential Schools, Re, [2002] A.R. Uned. 178 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 8].

Adams et al. v. Norcen Energy Resources Ltd. (1999), 248 A.R. 120 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 8].

Christensen et al. v. Proprietary Industries Inc. et al. (2002), 309 A.R. 201 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 8].

Compton Petroleum Corp. v. Alberta Power Ltd. (1999), 242 A.R. 3 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 8].

590988 Alberta Ltd. et al. v. 728699 Alberta Ltd. et al., [1999] A.R. Uned. 222 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 8].

688560 Alberta Ltd. et al. v. Genesis Land Developers Ltd. et al., [2000] A.R. Uned. 103 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 8].

Continental Bank of Canada v. Berg, [1986] A.J. No. 1300 (Q.B. Master), refd to. [para. 9].

R. v. Egger (J.H.), [1993] 2 S.C.R. 451; 153 N.R. 272; 141 A.R. 81; 46 W.A.C. 81, refd to. [para. 9].

R. v. Stinchcombe, [1991] 3 S.C.R. 326; 130 N.R. 277; 120 A.R. 161; 8 W.A.C. 161, refd to. [para. 9].

Inspiration Management Ltd. v. McDermid St. Lawrence Ltd., [1989] B.C.J. No. 1003 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 10].

Tracy v. Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. (1997), 122 Man.R.(2d) 98 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 11].

Kennedy (B.E.) Design Ltd. et al. v. Kibo Group Inc. et al. (2000), 269 A.R. 156 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 12].

Chevron Canada Resources v. Canada et al. (2001), 295 A.R. 388 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 13].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Annual Practice (1999), vol. 1, pp. 699 ff. [para. 6]; 703 ff. [para. 55].

Halsbury's Laws of England (1999) (4th Ed. - Reissue), vol. 45(2), para. 348 [paras. 13, 58].

Stevenson, W.A., and Côté, J.E., Civil Procedure Handbook 2003, pp. 124 to 128 [para. 13, Appendix A].

Supreme Court Practice - see Annual Prac­tice.

Whitebook - see Annual Practice.

Counsel:

Matthew R. Lindsay, Munaf Mohamed and Ward A. Hanson (Fraser Milner), for the applicant, Bank of Montreal;

Brian Beresh (Beresh Depoe Cunningham), for Nicholas Lysyk.

These applications were heard on February 21, 2003, by Veit, J., of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial District of Ed­monton, who delivered the following de­cision on February 25, 2003.