Lymer (Bankrupt), Re, (2016) 616 A.R. 190

JudgeCostigan, Paperny and Wakeling, JJ.A.
CourtCourt of Appeal (Alberta)
Case DateFebruary 02, 2016
Citations(2016), 616 A.R. 190;2016 ABCA 76

Lymer (Bankrupt), Re (2016), 616 A.R. 190; 672 W.A.C. 190 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2016] A.R. TBEd. MR.073

Neil Alan Lymer (appellant) v. Diane Jonsson, Georgina Porozni, Natalie Minckler, Keith Porozni, Michael Wygera, Willis Porozni, 1146601 Alberta Ltd., 1419253 Alberta Ltd. and 782409 Alberta Ltd. (respondents)

(1503-0159-AC; 2016 ABCA 76)

Indexed As: Lymer (Bankrupt), Re

Alberta Court of Appeal

Costigan, Paperny and Wakeling, JJ.A.

March 21, 2016.

Summary:

Both the registrar in bankruptcy and a Queen's Bench judge on appeal concluded that the registrar had jurisdiction to find the appellant (bankrupt) in contempt for failing to comply with the registrar's orders and impose sanctions, short of imprisonment, on him (an order of ex facie contempt). The appellant appealed.

The Alberta Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.

Bankruptcy - Topic 6753

Practice - Jurisdiction - Registrars - [See Contempt - Topic 5503 ].

Contempt - Topic 5503

Jurisdiction to punish for contempt - Registrar in bankruptcy - Both the registrar in bankruptcy and a Queen's Bench judge on appeal concluded that the registrar had jurisdiction to find the appellant (bankrupt) in contempt for failing to comply with the registrar's orders and impose sanctions, short of imprisonment, on him (an order of ex facie contempt) - The appellant appealed - The Alberta Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal - The court stated that "Several sections of the BIA are relevant to this interpretation question. Section 183(1)(d) vests jurisdiction in bankruptcy proceedings in the Court of Queen's Bench. Section 2 defines 'court' to include 'a registrar when exercising the powers of the court conferred on a registrar under this Act'. Sub-section 192(1) confers on registrars power and jurisdiction over a number of matters, including the power 'to hear and determine any matter relating to practice and procedure in the courts': s 192(1)(k). Sub-section 192(3) provides for a limit on the power of registrars, stating that 'a registrar has no power to commit for contempt of court'. In my view, these provisions, when read in context and given their ordinary meaning within the scheme and object of the BIA, expressly confer on the registrar the power to make a finding of ex facie contempt and to impose sanctions for that contempt, short of imprisonment".

Counsel:

S.M. Renouf, Q.C., for the appellant;

P.D. Kirwin, for the respondents.

This appeal was heard on February 2, 2016, before Costigan, Paperny and Wakeling, JJ.A., of the Alberta Court of Appeal. The following reasons for judgment reserved were delivered for the Court of Appeal by Costigan, J.A., on March 21, 2016.

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 practice notes
  • Lymer (Re), 2018 ABQB 859
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
    • October 22, 2018
    ...contempt finding and the finding of contempt were confirmed on appeal: Re Lymer, 2015 ABQB 347 , 618 AR 209 , aff’d Lymer v Jonsson, 2016 ABCA 76, 616 AR 190 . Mr. Lymer’s ongoing contempt was subsequently confirmed: Lymer (Re), 2017 ABQB 110 , aff’d Lymer (Re) (26 May 2017), Edmonton 2......
  • Goodswimmer v Canada (Attorney General),, 2016 ABQB 384
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
    • July 8, 2016
    ...Design Inc v Plum and Posey Inc, 2016 ABCA 12 at para 11 (summary dismissal granted despite no formal application for summary dismissal); 2016 ABCA 76; Sandhu v Siri Guru Nanak Sikh Gurdwara of Alberta , 2015 ABCA 101 at para 79-80 (oppression and restructuring of a society); and Canadian N......
  • Jonsson v Lymer, 2020 ABCA 167
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Alberta)
    • May 1, 2020
    ...found in contempt: Lymer (Re), 2014 ABQB 674 , affirmed 2015 ABQB 347 , 618 AR 209 , which was affirmed Lymer v Jonsson, 2016 ABCA 76, 616 AR 190. He failed to fully purge his contempt: Lymer (Re), 2017 ABQB 110 affirmed Lymer v Jonsson, 2018 ABCA 36 . The investors then brought the p......
  • Moshinsky-Helm v Helm,
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Alberta)
    • January 1, 2022
    ...is not contempt because of the exception for ‘an order to pay money’ in R. 10.52(3)(a)(i)”). [14] Lymer v. Jonsson, 2016 ABCA 76, ¶¶ 8 & 10 (“At common law, superior courts have the inherent jurisdiction to sanction for both contempt in the presence......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
6 cases
  • Lymer (Re), 2018 ABQB 859
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
    • October 22, 2018
    ...contempt finding and the finding of contempt were confirmed on appeal: Re Lymer, 2015 ABQB 347 , 618 AR 209 , aff’d Lymer v Jonsson, 2016 ABCA 76, 616 AR 190 . Mr. Lymer’s ongoing contempt was subsequently confirmed: Lymer (Re), 2017 ABQB 110 , aff’d Lymer (Re) (26 May 2017), Edmonton 2......
  • Goodswimmer v Canada (Attorney General),, 2016 ABQB 384
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
    • July 8, 2016
    ...Design Inc v Plum and Posey Inc, 2016 ABCA 12 at para 11 (summary dismissal granted despite no formal application for summary dismissal); 2016 ABCA 76; Sandhu v Siri Guru Nanak Sikh Gurdwara of Alberta , 2015 ABCA 101 at para 79-80 (oppression and restructuring of a society); and Canadian N......
  • Jonsson v Lymer, 2020 ABCA 167
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Alberta)
    • May 1, 2020
    ...found in contempt: Lymer (Re), 2014 ABQB 674 , affirmed 2015 ABQB 347 , 618 AR 209 , which was affirmed Lymer v Jonsson, 2016 ABCA 76, 616 AR 190. He failed to fully purge his contempt: Lymer (Re), 2017 ABQB 110 affirmed Lymer v Jonsson, 2018 ABCA 36 . The investors then brought the p......
  • Moshinsky-Helm v Helm,
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Alberta)
    • January 1, 2022
    ...is not contempt because of the exception for ‘an order to pay money’ in R. 10.52(3)(a)(i)”). [14] Lymer v. Jonsson, 2016 ABCA 76, ¶¶ 8 & 10 (“At common law, superior courts have the inherent jurisdiction to sanction for both contempt in the presence......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT