B.S.A. Investors Ltd. et al. v. Mosly et al., 2007 BCCA 94

JudgeRyan, Saunders and Kirkpatrick, JJ.A.
CourtCourt of Appeal (British Columbia)
Case DateMarch 27, 2006
JurisdictionBritish Columbia
Citations2007 BCCA 94;(2007), 242 B.C.A.C. 217 (CA)

BSA Inv. Ltd. v. Mosly (2007), 242 B.C.A.C. 217 (CA);

    400 W.A.C. 217

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2007] B.C.A.C. TBEd. MY.029

B.S.A. Investors Ltd. and Gang Ranch Ltd. (respondents/cross-appellants/plaintiffs) v. Adel Mosly and Saudi Arabian-Canadian Business Corporation (defendants) and Douglas Symes & Brissenden (appellant/cross-respondent/defendant)

(CA032596; 2007 BCCA 94)

Indexed As: B.S.A. Investors Ltd. et al. v. Mosly et al.

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Ryan, Saunders and Kirkpatrick, JJ.A.

May 10, 2007.

Summary:

The plaintiffs retained the services of Mosly to negotiate a second mortgage. Mosly entered into a transaction with a private investor for $550,000. Mosly asked the defendant law firm to prepare the necessary documentation. Mosly falsely claimed that he had obtained the necessary resolutions from two of the plaintiffs' directors authorizing the loans. The documents were signed and the plaintiffs obtained the loan. The law firm provided Mosly with a cheque payable to the plaintiffs. Mosly deposited the cheque and then transferred the money to his personal account. The plaintiffs sued Mosly, alleging that he acted fraudulently and breached his fiduciary duties. The plaintiffs sued the law firm in negligence.

The British Columbia Supreme Court, in a decision reported at [2004] B.C.T.C. 1706, allowed the action against Mosley and the law firm. The law firm appealed.

The British Columbia Court of Appeal allowed the appeal.

Barristers and Solicitors - Topic 2595.1

Negligence - Particular negligent acts - Re mortgages - [See Torts - Topic 54 ].

Torts - Topic 54

Negligence - Causation - Test for (incl. "but for" test and "material contribution" test) - The plaintiffs retained the services of Mosly to negotiate a second mortgage - Mosly entered into a transaction with a private investor - Mosly asked the defendant law firm to prepare the necessary documentation - Mosly falsely claimed that he had obtained the necessary resolutions from two of the plaintiffs' directors authorizing the loans - The documents were signed and the plaintiffs obtained the loan - The law firm provided Mosly with a cheque payable to the plaintiffs - Mosly deposited the cheque and then transferred the money to his personal account - The plaintiffs sued the law firm in negligence - The trial judge allowed the action - The onus fell on the plaintiffs to prove causation on a balance of probabilities - The plaintiffs had not done so because there was a paucity of evidence - However, because the lack of evidence was the result of the defendant's negligence, the trial judge considered it was an appropriate circumstance to draw an inference of causation in favour of the plaintiffs - The British Columbia Court of Appeal allowed the law firm's appeal - It was not "impossible, in the practical sense" for the plaintiffs to lead evidence on causation - Even though Mosly did not testify, there was still a great deal of evidence led through other witnesses that reflected upon his character - This was circumstantial evidence from which the trial judge could have drawn logical inferences as to Mosly's likely course of action had he been confronted with a request for a second signature - Further, even if this evidence did not happen to be on the record, it was possible for the plaintiffs to lead it - The plaintiffs were ultimately responsible for proving that the law firm's breach of duty made a difference.

Cases Noticed:

Snell v. Farrell, [1990] 2 S.C.R. 311; 110 N.R. 200; 107 N.B.R.(2d) 94; 267 A.P.R. 94; 72 D.L.R.(4th) 289, refd to. [para. 24].

Haag v. Marshall, [1990] 1 W.W.R. 361; 39 B.C.L.R.(2d) 205; 61 D.L.R.(4th) 371; 1 C.C.L.T.(2d) 99 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 24].

Air Canada v. M & L Travel Ltd., Martin and Valliant, [1993] 3 S.C.R. 787; 159 N.R. 1; 67 O.A.C. 1; 108 D.L.R.(4th) 592, dist. [para. 26].

McGhee v. National Coal Board, [1973] 1 W.L.R. 1 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 34].

Wilsher v. Essex Area Health Authority, [1988] 2 W.L.R. 557; [1988] 1 A.C. 1074; 87 N.R. 140 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 35].

Fairchild v. Glenhaven Funeral Services Ltd. et al., [2002] 3 W.L.R. 89; 293 N.R. 1; [2002] 3 All E.R. 305; [2002] UKHL 22 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 35].

Trinetti v. Hunter et al. (2005), 218 B.C.A.C. 228; 359 W.A.C. 228; 47 B.C.L.R.(4th) 290; 2005 BCCA 549, refd to. [para. 36].

Hanke v. Resurfice Corp. et al. (2007), 357 N.R. 175; 404 A.R. 333; 394 W.A.C. 333; 2007 SCC 7, refd to. [para. 44].

Rieger et al. v. Croft & Finlay et al. (1992), 69 B.C.L.R.(2d) 288 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 49].

Shiokawa v. Tohyama et al. (2005), 208 B.C.A.C. 203; 344 W.A.C. 203; 42 B.C.L.R.(4th) 48; 2005 BCCA 95, refd to. [para. 49].

Counsel:

J. Webster, Q.C., and P.D. Warnett, for the appellant/cross-respondents;

D.R. Bennett and R.P. Berger, for the respondents/cross-appellants.

This appeal was heard on March 27, 2006, at Vancouver, B.C., by Ryan, Saunders and Kirkpatrick, JJ.A., of the British Columbia Court of Appeal. Ryan, J.A., delivered the following judgment for the Court of Appeal on May 10, 2007.

To continue reading

Request your trial
19 practice notes
  • Fullowka et al. v. Pinkerton's of Canada Ltd. et al., (2008) 433 A.R. 69 (NWTCA)
    • Canada
    • Northwest Territories Court of Appeal (Northwest Territories)
    • May 22, 2008
    ...647; 268 N.R. 68; 145 O.A.C. 302; 2001 SCC 23, refd to. [para. 196, footnote 303]. B.S.A. Investors Ltd. et al. v. Mosly et al. (2007), 242 B.C.A.C. 217; 400 W.A.C. 217; 283 D.L.R.(4th) 220; 2007 BCCA 94, refd to. [para. 196, footnote Myers v. Peel County Board of Education and Jowett, [198......
  • Ball v. Imperial Oil Resources Ltd., (2010) 477 A.R. 251 (CA)
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Alberta)
    • January 14, 2010
    ...B.C.A.C. 267; 401 W.A.C. 267; 68 B.C.L.R.(4th) 288; 2007 BCCA 349, refd to. [para. 93]. B.S.A. Investors Ltd. et al. v. Mosly et al. (2007), 242 B.C.A.C. 217; 400 W.A.C. 217; 69 B.C.L.R.(4th) 242; 2007 BCCA 94, refd to. [para. Fisher v. Atack et al. (2008), 242 O.A.C. 164; 2008 ONCA 759, re......
  • Dhillon v. Jaffer et al., (2014) 356 B.C.A.C. 252 (CA)
    • Canada
    • British Columbia Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
    • June 6, 2014
    ...v. Canada (Attorney General) (2006), 408 A.R. 207; 2006 ABQB 730, refd to. [para. 38]. B.S.A. Investors Ltd. et al. v. Mosly et al. (2007), 242 B.C.A.C. 217; 400 W.A.C. 217; 2007 BCCA 94, refd to. [para. 42]. Haag v. Marshall (1990), 39 B.C.L.R.(2d) 205 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 42]. Devji v.......
  • 3021386 NS Limited v. Harding,
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of Nova Scotia (Canada)
    • July 8, 2022
    ...of care, then the negligence did not cause the Mr. Musgrave's loss: see Rice v. Condran, 2012 NSSC 95; BSA Investors Ltd v. Mosly, 2007 BCCA 94 at para 54      A finding of breach of duty is a separate issue from causation. Causation cannot be assumed from a br......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
18 cases
  • Fullowka et al. v. Pinkerton's of Canada Ltd. et al., (2008) 433 A.R. 69 (NWTCA)
    • Canada
    • Northwest Territories Court of Appeal (Northwest Territories)
    • May 22, 2008
    ...647; 268 N.R. 68; 145 O.A.C. 302; 2001 SCC 23, refd to. [para. 196, footnote 303]. B.S.A. Investors Ltd. et al. v. Mosly et al. (2007), 242 B.C.A.C. 217; 400 W.A.C. 217; 283 D.L.R.(4th) 220; 2007 BCCA 94, refd to. [para. 196, footnote Myers v. Peel County Board of Education and Jowett, [198......
  • Dhillon v. Jaffer et al., (2014) 356 B.C.A.C. 252 (CA)
    • Canada
    • British Columbia Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
    • June 6, 2014
    ...v. Canada (Attorney General) (2006), 408 A.R. 207; 2006 ABQB 730, refd to. [para. 38]. B.S.A. Investors Ltd. et al. v. Mosly et al. (2007), 242 B.C.A.C. 217; 400 W.A.C. 217; 2007 BCCA 94, refd to. [para. 42]. Haag v. Marshall (1990), 39 B.C.L.R.(2d) 205 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 42]. Devji v.......
  • Ball v. Imperial Oil Resources Ltd., (2010) 477 A.R. 251 (CA)
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Alberta)
    • January 14, 2010
    ...B.C.A.C. 267; 401 W.A.C. 267; 68 B.C.L.R.(4th) 288; 2007 BCCA 349, refd to. [para. 93]. B.S.A. Investors Ltd. et al. v. Mosly et al. (2007), 242 B.C.A.C. 217; 400 W.A.C. 217; 69 B.C.L.R.(4th) 242; 2007 BCCA 94, refd to. [para. Fisher v. Atack et al. (2008), 242 O.A.C. 164; 2008 ONCA 759, re......
  • 3021386 NS Limited v. Harding,
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of Nova Scotia (Canada)
    • July 8, 2022
    ...of care, then the negligence did not cause the Mr. Musgrave's loss: see Rice v. Condran, 2012 NSSC 95; BSA Investors Ltd v. Mosly, 2007 BCCA 94 at para 54      A finding of breach of duty is a separate issue from causation. Causation cannot be assumed from a br......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 firm's commentaries

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT