Braun (Bankrupt), Re, (2006) 384 A.R. 80 (CA)

• Judge: Berger, Costigan and O'Brien, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Alberta)
• Case Date: Friday December 02, 2005
• Citations: (2006), 384 A.R. 80 (CA);2006 ABCA 23

Braun (Bankrupt), Re (2006), 384 A.R. 80 (CA);

    367 W.A.C. 80

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2006] A.R. TBEd. AP.098

In The Matter Of the Bankruptcy of Cheryl-Lynn Braun, also known as Cheryl-Lynne Dodd, also known as Cheryl-Lynne Braun, operating as Ready Cash Ltd.

Deloitte & Touche Inc., Trustee of the Estate Of Cheryl-Lynne Braun (respondent/ applicant) v. Cheryl-Lynne Braun, also known as Cheryl-Lynne Dodd, also known as Cheryl-Lynne Braun, operating as Ready Cash Ltd. (appellant/respondent)

(0503-0094-AC; 2006 ABCA 23)

Indexed As: Braun (Bankrupt), Re

Alberta Court of Appeal

Berger, Costigan and O'Brien, JJ.A.

January 20, 2006.

Summary:

A bankrupt (Braun) had been repeatedly sentenced to periods of incarceration for civil contempt arising from her failure to provide an affidavit and attend examinations for discovery as directed by the Court of Queen's Bench. On each occasion, a fixed term of imprisonment was imposed and Braun was ordered to reappear before the Court to provide evidence of compliance with the orders or to provide evidence of her reasons for failing to comply. Braun appealed the latest order. She obtained a stay of the order pending appeal.

The Alberta Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and vacated the order.

Contempt - Topic 6

General principles - Power of courts - A bankrupt (Braun) had been repeatedly sentenced to periods of incarceration for civil contempt - On each occasion, a fixed term of imprisonment was imposed and Braun was ordered to reappear before the Court to provide evidence of compliance with the orders or to provide evidence of her reasons for failing to comply - Braun appealed the latest order which sentenced her to a further term of four months' imprisonment - She argued that the court below was functus officio to impose any further sentence for contempt given that she was found in contempt and given a determinate term of imprisonment - The Alberta Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and vacated the order - The determinate sentence of imprisonment brought the contempt proceedings to an end - The court stated, inter alia, that when penal sanction such as imprisonment or a fine were imposed for civil contempt, the judicial arsenal was not thereby depleted - The court retained control over its own process and, if the unpurged contempt affected the fair adjudication of the suit, non-penal sanctions might still be invoked.

Contempt - Topic 10

General principles - Scope of contempt power - [See Contempt - Topic 6].

Contempt - Topic 3324

Punishment - Imprisonment - General - [See Contempt - Topic 6].

Courts - Topic 2192

Jurisdiction - Loss or termination of jurisdiction upon fulfilling function (functus officio) - Contempt - [See Contempt - Topic 6].

Cases Noticed:

MacMillan Bloedel Ltd. v. Simpson et al., [1995] 4 S.C.R. 725; 191 N.R. 260; 68 B.C.A.C. 161; 112 W.A.C. 161, refd to. [para. 10].

R. v. Vermette, [1987] 1 S.C.R. 577; 74 N.R. 221; 77 A.R. 372, refd to. [para. 10].

United Nurses of Alberta v. Alberta (Attorney General), [1992] 1 S.C.R. 901; 135 N.R. 321; 125 A.R. 241; 14 W.A.C. 241, refd to. [para. 10].

Sussex Group Ltd. v. Sylvester, [2002] O.T.C. 908; 62 O.R.(3d) 123 (Sup. Ct.), refd to. [para. 10].

Turkawski et al. v. 738675 Alberta Ltd. et al. (2004), 372 A.R. 280; 2004 ABQB 845, refd to. [para. 13].

Kumari v. Jalal, [1997] 1 W.L.R. 97 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 13].

Danchevsky v. Danchevsky (1977), 121 Sol. Jo. 796 (C.A. Civ. Div.), refd to. [para. 14].

Lamb v. Lamb, [1984] F.L.R. 278, refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Neuburger (J.) (1995), 55 B.C.A.C. 2; 90 W.A.C. 2 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 18].

Skeena Kraft Ltd. v. Pulp & Paper Workers of Canada, Local 4, [1971] 1 W.W.R. 515 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 18].

Broda v. Broda et al. (2004), 346 A.R. 376; 320 W.A.C. 376; 2004 ABCA 73, refd to. [para. 19].

L.M.B. v. I.J.B. - see Broda v. Broda et al.

Videotron ltée et Premier Choix: TVEC Inc. v. Industries Microlec produits electroniques Inc. et autres, [1992] 2 S.C.R. 1065; 141 N.R. 281; 50 Q.A.C. 161, refd to. [para. 19].

Jelson (Estates) Ltd. v. Harvey, [1984] 1 All E.R. 12 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 20].

El Capistrano SA et al. v. ATO Marketing Ltd., [1989] 2 All E.R. 572 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 20].

Enfield London Borough Council v. Mahoney, [1983] 2 All E.R. 901 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 21].

United Nurses of Alberta v. Alberta (Attorney General) (1990), 104 A.R. 246 (C.A.), affd. [1992] 1 S.C.R. 901; 135 N.R. 321; 125 A.R. 241; 14 W.A.C. 241, refd to. [para. 26].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Arlidge, Anthony, Eady, David, and Smith, A.T.H., Contempt (2nd Ed. 1999), para. 3-37 [para. 13].

Borrie and Lowe, The Law of Contempt (2nd Ed. 1983), generally [para. 10].

Counsel:

D.C. Stachnik, Q.C., for the respondent/applicant;

R.J. Wachowich and F.D. Cook, for the appellant/respondent.

This appeal was heard on December 2, 2005, by Berger, Costigan and O'Brien, JJ.A., of the Alberta Court of Appeal. Berger, J.A., delivered the following reasons for judgment for the court on January 20, 2006.