International Institute of Management Inc. v. Edmonton Co-operative Association Ltd. et al., 2000 ABQB 181

• Judge: Clarke, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
• Case Date: March 20, 2000
• Citations: 2000 ABQB 181;(2000), 263 A.R. 326 (QB)

Institute of Mgt. v. Edmonton Co-op (2000), 263 A.R. 326 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2000] A.R. TBEd. AP.145

International Institute of Management Inc., operating as Grosvenor Stamp Company (plaintiff) v. Edmonton Co-operative Association Ltd. and Federated Co-operatives Ltd. (defendants)

(Action No. 9003-16224)

International Institute of Management Inc., operating as Grosvenor Stamp Company (plaintiff) v. Edmonton Co-operative Association Ltd. and Federated Co-operatives Ltd. (defendants)

(Action No. 9003-16223; 2000 ABQB 181)

Indexed As: International Institute of Management Inc. v. Edmonton Co-operative Association Ltd. et al.

Alberta Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial District of Edmonton

Clarke, J.

March 20, 2000.

Summary:

The plaintiff sued the defendants (subsidi­ary and parent) for damages for property damage. Shortly thereafter, the subsidiary was petitioned into bankruptcy. The subsidi­ary applied for a discharge. There were insufficient funds to pay other than the secured creditor (parent), so the plaintiff's claim in bankruptcy ($502,000) was not challenged. The subsidiary was subsequently discharged and the $502,000 claim was one of the listed unsecured claims. The plaintiff subsequently applied for summary judgment for the $502,000, submitting that his claim had been finally determined in the bank­ruptcy proceeding (which had not been appealed) and the defendants could not now challenge liability for $502,000. A Master's dismissal of the summary judgment applica­tion was affirmed by the Court of Queen's Bench and was not appealed. The plaintiff applied to another Court of Queen's Bench for judgment confirming the defendants' liability at $502,000. That application was also dismissed and not appealed. Notwith­standing those two judgments, the plaintiff again sought summary judgment for $502,000, claiming that the issue of liability was determined in the bankruptcy proceed­ings and the defendants were estopped from challenging liability. The defendants moved to strike the notice of motion and affidavit.

The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench allowed the defendants' application. The plaintiff was not entitled to summary judg­ment. Given that the plaintiff was twice denied summary judgment by the Court of Queen's Bench, the matter was res judicata. Alternatively, there was no final determina­tion of the defendants' liability in the bank­ruptcy proceedings. The amount of the plaintiff's claim was not fundamental to the substantive decision to grant a discharge. Further, a deemed proved claim in bank­ruptcy was not a final judgment proved on a balance of probabilities.

Estoppel - Topic 386

Estoppel by record (res judicata) - Res judicata as a bar to subsequent proceedings - Issues decided in prior proceedings - The plaintiff sued the defendants (subsidi­ary and parent) for damages - The sub­sidiary went bankrupt - There were insuf­ficient funds to pay other than the secured creditor (parent), so the plaintiff's claim in bankruptcy ($502,000) was not challenged - The subsidiary was discharged - The plaintiff sought summary judgment for $502,000, submitting that his claim was finally determined in the unappealed bank­ruptcy proceeding and the defendants were estopped from challenging liability for $502,000 - A Master's dismissal of the summary judgment application was affirmed by the Court of Queen's Bench and was not appealed - The plaintiff applied to another Court of Queen's Bench for judgment confirming the defendants' liability at $502,000 - That application was also dismissed and not appealed - Notwithstanding those two judgments, the plaintiff again sought summary judgment for $502,000 - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held that the plaintiff was not entitled to summary judgment - Given that the plaintiff was twice denied sum­mary judgment by the Court of Queen's Bench, the matter was res judicata - Al­ternatively, there was no final determina­tion of the defendants' liability in the bankruptcy proceedings - The amount of the plaintiff's claim was not fundamental to the substantive decision to grant a dis­charge - Further, a deemed proved claim in bankruptcy was not a final judgment proved on a balance of probabilities.

Cases Noticed:

Doering v. Grandview (Town), [1976] 1 W.W.R. 388; 7 N.R. 299 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 12].

Turigan et al. v. Alberta (1988), 90 A.R. 118; 62 Alta. L.R.(2d) 1 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 12].

420093 B.C. Ltd. v. Bank of Montreal, [1996] 1 W.W.R. 561; 174 A.R. 214; 102 W.A.C. 214 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 13].

Angle v. Minister of National Revenue, [1975] 2 S.C.R. 248; 2 N.R. 397, refd to. [para. 14].

Claude Resources Inc. (Bankrupt), Re (1993), 115 Sask.R. 35; 22 C.B.R.(3d) 56 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 18].

Confederation Treasury Services Ltd. (Bankrupt), Re (1997), 96 O.A.C. 75; 43 C.B.R.(3d) 4 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 18].

New Home Warranty of British Columbia (Bankrupt), Re (1999), 21 B.C.T.C. 118; 178 D.L.R.(4th) 381 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 18].

Statutes Noticed:

Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. B-3, sect. 121(2) [para. 17].

Bankruptcy and Insolvency Rules, SOR/78-389, rule 94(1) [para. 17].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Bennett on Bankruptcy (3rd Ed. 1993), p. 179 [para. 15].

Counsel:

William Grosvenor (self-represented), for the plaintiff;

Vaughn Cox, for the defendants.

This application was heard before Clarke, J., of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial District of Edmonton, who delivered the following judgment on March 20, 2000.