General Motors Acceptance Corp. of Canada Ltd. v. Roanoke Forest Products Ltd. et al., (1991) 1 B.C.A.C. 233 (CA)

• Judge: Anderson, Wallace and Toy, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
• Case Date: May 24, 1991
• Jurisdiction: British Columbia
• Citations: (1991), 1 B.C.A.C. 233 (CA)

GMAC v. Roanoke Forest Products (1991), 1 B.C.A.C. 233 (CA);

    1 W.A.C. 233

MLB headnote and full text

General Motors Acceptance Corporation of Canada Limited (petitioner/respondent) v. Roanoke Forest Products Ltd. (respondent) and M. Albert Rodenbush (respondent/appellant)

(No. CA009992)

Indexed As: General Motors Acceptance Corp. of Canada Ltd. v. Roanoke Forest Products Ltd. et al.

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Anderson, Wallace and Toy, JJ.A.

June 10, 1991.

Summary:

Rodenbush purchased a vehicle and entered a conditional sales contract with G.M.A.C. G.M.A.C. seized the vehicle which was in a state of disrepair. G.M.A.C. obtained an ex parte order that the "seize or sue" provisions of s. 19 of the Sale of Goods on Condition Act were inapplicable because the car was allowed to deteriorate. Rodenbush applied to set aside the ex parte order.

The British Columbia Supreme Court dismissed the application. Rodenbush appealed.

The British Columbia Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.

Conditional Sales - Topic 1807

Seller's remedies - Repossession and sale - Exemptions from legislative provisions -[See Practice - Topic 6254 ].

Practice - Topic 6254

Judgments and orders - Setting aside orders - Ex parte orders - Rodenbush and his company purchased a vehicle subject to a conditional sales contract in favour of G.M.A.C. - The car was immediately given to an employee of a subsidiary company - Rodenbush never drove the vehicle, but saw it weekly - The car fell into a state of disrepair - The companies went into receivership - Payments stopped - G.M.A.C. seized the vehicle - G.M.A.C. obtained an ex parte order that the "seize or sue" provisions of s. 19 of the Sale of Goods on Condition Act were inapplicable because Rodenbush allowed the car's condition to deteriorate - The British Columbia Court of Appeal refused to set aside the ex parte order where the motions judge was permitted to make the order having regard to all the circumstances.

Cases Noticed:

General Motors Acceptance Corp. v. Bowick (1988), 29 B.C.L.R.(2d) 36 (B.C.C.A.), dist. [para. 6].

G.M.A.C. - see General Motors Acceptance Corp.

Statutes Noticed:

Rules of Court (B.C.), Supreme Court Rules, rule 10(6) [paras. 9, 11].

Sale of Goods on Condition Act, R.S.B.C. 1979, c. 373, sect. 19 [para. 1 et seq.]; sect. 19(4) [paras. 6, 7, 11].

Supreme Court Rules (B.C.) - see Rules of Court (B.C.).

Counsel:

B.J. Freedman, for the appellant;

   J.M. Sullivan, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard in Vancouver, B.C., on May 24, 1991, before Anderson, Wallace and Toy, JJ.A., of the British Columbia Court of Appeal. The decision of the court was delivered by Wallace, J.A., on June 10, 1991.