Kel-Ann Enterprises Ltd. v. Tropical Landscapers (1966) Ltd. et al., (1997) 163 N.S.R.(2d) 114 (SC)

• Judge: Hood, J.
• Court: Supreme Court of Nova Scotia (Canada)
• Case Date: March 05, 1997
• Jurisdiction: Nova Scotia
• Citations: (1997), 163 N.S.R.(2d) 114 (SC)

Kel-Ann v. Tropical Landscapers (1997), 163 N.S.R.(2d) 114 (SC);

    487 A.P.R. 114

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [1997] N.S.R.(2d) TBEd. OC.008

Kel-Ann Enterprises Limited, a body corporate (plaintiff) v. Tropical Landscapers (1966) Limited and 2257515 Nova Scotia Limited, bodies corporate (defendants)

(S.H. No. 134494C)

Indexed As: Kel-Ann Enterprises Ltd. v. Tropical Landscapers (1966) Ltd. et al.

Nova Scotia Supreme Court

Hood, J.

March 5, 1997.

Summary:

Kel-Ann Enterprises Ltd. (Kel-Ann) sued Tropical Landscapers (1966) Ltd. (Tropical) and 2257515 Nova Scotia Ltd. (2257515). Kel-Ann applied to strike the defences of both defendants. Kel-Ann also requested summary judgment against Tropical.

The Nova Scotia Supreme Court, in a decision not reported in this series, struck the defence of 2257515 regarding the princi­pal amount outstanding. It did not strike the defence in regard to the interest issue. The court also declined to strike Tropical's defence. Subsequently, the court issued a decision in regard to the second application in which it declined to grant summary judg­ment against Tropical.

Practice - Topic 5708

Judgments and orders - Summary judg­ments - Bar to application - Existence of issue to be tried - Kel-Ann Enterprises Ltd. (Kel-Ann) sued Tropical Landscapers (1966) Ltd. (Tropical) and 2257515 Nova Scotia Ltd. (2257515) - Kel-Ann sub­mitted that a principal of the defendants misrepresented the corporate status of the two defendants at a meeting to discuss payment of the debt, or the two companies were set up to defeat creditors, and there­fore, in either case, the court should pierce the corporate veil - Kel-Ann requested summary judgment against Tropical - The Nova Scotia Supreme Court held that the issues in dispute must be left for the trial judge - Therefore, the court declined to grant summary judgment against Tropical.

Cases Noticed:

Lunenburg County Press Ltd. v. Deamond (1977), 18 N.S.R.(2d) 689; 20 A.P.R. 689 (C.A.), consd. [para. 4].

Bank of Nova Scotia v. Chateau Plumbing & Heating Ltd. et al. (1992), 111 N.S.R.(2d) 361; 303 A.P.R. 361 (T.D.), consd. [para. 5].

Fancy (B.F.) Construction Ltd. v. Alta Surety Co. (1991), 107 N.S.R.(2d) 152; 290 A.P.R. 152 (T.D.), consd. [para. 6].

Oceanus Marine Inc. v. Saunders (1996), 153 N.S.R.(2d) 267; 450 A.P.R. 267 (C.A.), consd. [para. 8].

Statutes Noticed:

Civil Procedure Rules (N.S.), rule 13.01 [para. 3].

Rules of Civil Procedure (N.S.) - see Civil Procedure Rules.

Rules of Court (N.S.) - see Civil Pro­cedure Rules (N.S.).

Counsel:

Aidan J. Meade, for the plaintiff;

Jeffrey S. Moors, representing Cynthia L. Chewter, on record, for the defendants.

This application was heard in Chambers, at Halifax, Nova Scotia, before Hood, J., of the Nova Scotia Supreme Court, who delivered the following decision orally on March 5, 1997, with written reasons released on Sep­tember 24, 1997.