Langdale v. Register.com Inc. et al., 2016 NSSC 171

• Judge: Campbell, J.
• Court: Supreme Court of Nova Scotia (Canada)
• Case Date: June 20, 2016
• Jurisdiction: Nova Scotia
• Citations: 2016 NSSC 171;(2016), 375 N.S.R.(2d) 137 (SC)

Langdale v. Register.com Inc. (2016), 375 N.S.R.(2d) 137 (SC);

    1182 A.P.R. 137

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2016] N.S.R.(2d) TBEd. JN.057

Glendon Herbert Langdale (plaintiff) v. Register.com Inc. and RCOM Canada Corp. carrying on business as Register.com, Dr. Drew C.G. Bethune and Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre (defendants)

(Hfx. No. 319086; 2016 NSSC 171)

Indexed As: Langdale v. Register.com Inc. et al.

Nova Scotia Supreme Court

Campbell, J.

June 24, 2016.

Summary:

Langdale's lawyer filed a notice of action on behalf of Langdale on October 29, 2009. The time for service (one year) and renewal (14 months) were not met. Langdale applied under Civil Procedure Rule 4.04(5) to renew the notice of action. At issue was whether Langdale had established that inadvertence had led to the expiry of the notice of action.

The Nova Scotia Supreme Court dismissed the motion.

Practice - Topic 1471

Pleadings - Statement of claim - General - Expiry and renewal - Langdale's lawyer (Richey) filed a notice of action on behalf of Langdale on October 29, 2009 - The time for service (one year) and renewal (14 months) were not met - Langdale applied under Civil Procedure Rule 4.04(5) to renew the notice of action - The Nova Scotia Supreme Court dismissed the motion, stating that "Unless the plaintiff can establish that inadvertence led to the expiry of the notice, it cannot be renewed. The issues of serious prejudice and costs do not enter into the matter. Whether inadvertence led to the expiry is a threshold question. ... The inadvertence is with respect to the expiry of the notice, not the failure to renew it. ... Here, Mr. Richey's letter of February 7, 2011 to the Prothonotary contradicts his affidavit. The affidavit says that it was an oversight. He simply mistakenly missed the deadline. But when reminded of that deadline his response was not to respond to a mistake. It was not to acknowledge the mistake. It was not to immediately make a motion to renew. He said he would do that, though he never did. The letter suggests that the expiry of the notice was no cause for alarm. It was not because of a mistake at all. It was because of a decision to await further medical information, or to continue negotiations. ... The plaintiff has not established that inadvertence led to the expiry of the Notice of Action." - See paragraphs 33 to 36.

Counsel:

Jason Cooke, for the plaintiff;

Dillon Trider, for the defendants, Register.com Inc. and RCOM Canada Corp;

Joseph Herschorn, for the defendant, Dr. Drew C.G. Bethune;

Karen Bennett-Clayton and Carman McCormick, for the defendant, Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre.

This motion was heard at Halifax, Nova Scotia, on June 20, 2016, by Campbell, J., of the Nova Scotia Supreme Court, who delivered the following judgment on June 24, 2016.