Caspian Construction Inc. v. Drake Surveys Ltd., (2003) 182 Man.R.(2d) 14 (QB)

• Judge: Nurgitz, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Manitoba (Canada)
• Case Date: December 10, 2003
• Jurisdiction: Manitoba
• Citations: (2003), 182 Man.R.(2d) 14 (QB);2003 MBQB 281

Caspian Constr. v. Drake Surveys (2003), 182 Man.R.(2d) 14 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2003] Man.R.(2d) TBEd. DE.022

Caspian Construction Inc. (plaintiff) v. Drake Surveys Ltd. (defendant)

(CI 02-01-26984; 2003 MBQB 281)

Indexed As: Caspian Construction Inc. v. Drake Surveys Ltd.

Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench

Winnipeg Centre

Nurgitz, J.

December 10, 2003.

Summary:

The plaintiff sued the defendant in Manitoba. The defendant moved for an order declaring Alberta to be the forum conveniens.

A Master of the Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench, in a decision reported at 174 Man.R.(2d) 263, dismissed the motion. The defendant appealed.

The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the appeal.

Conflict of Laws - Topic 7284

Contracts - Jurisdiction - Forum conveniens - The plaintiff, a general contractor, was registered and carried on business in Manitoba (although it had Alberta offices) - It sued the defendant in Manitoba, alleging negligent performance of a contract for surveying services - The defendant argued that Alberta was the forum conveniens - The services had been provided for an Alberta project - The defendant's business was in Alberta - Virtually all of its witnesses and documentary evidence were in Alberta - The majority of the plaintiff's evidence was in Manitoba - The plaintiff had previously commenced a similar action in Alberta, but undertook to discontinue it if the Manitoba action proceeded - A Master held that Manitoba was the most convenient forum - The Master was not satisfied that Alberta could adjudicate the dispute at any less inconvenience and expense than Manitoba - The plaintiff's right to choose a forum should be upheld - The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the defendant's appeal.

Counsel:

Robert L. Tapper, Q.C., and Timothy J. Fry, for the plaintiff;

Rinus de Waal, for the defendant.

This appeal was heard by Nurgitz, J., of the Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench, Winnipeg Centre, who delivered the following decision on December 10, 2003.