McNeill Electronics Ltd. v. American Sensors Electronics Inc., (1998) 108 O.A.C. 257 (CA)

• Court: Court of Appeal (Ontario)
• Case Date: January 29, 1998
• Jurisdiction: Ontario
• Citations: (1998), 108 O.A.C. 257 (CA)

McNeill Electronics v. Am. Sensors (1998), 108 O.A.C. 257 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [1998] O.A.C. TBEd. FE.028

McNeill Electronics Limited (plaintiff/respondent) v. American Sensors Electronics Inc. (defendant/appellant)

(Court File Nos. C25897; C26157)

Indexed As: McNeill Electronics Ltd. v. American Sensors Electronics Inc.

Ontario Court of Appeal

Robins and Catzman, JJ.A., and Lederman, J.(ad hoc)

January 29, 1998.

Summary:

A case management action was placed on the "fast track". The defendant was noted in default. The defendant applied to set aside the noting in default.

The Ontario Court (General Division), in a decision reported at 15 O.T.C. 20, dismissed the motion. The defendant appealed.

The Ontario Court of Appeal allowed the appeal.

Practice - Topic 6197

Judgments and orders - Setting aside default judgments (incl. noting in default) - Grounds - A case management action was placed on the "fast track" - The defendant was noted in default - The defendant applied to set aside the noting in default - A motions judge dis­missed the motion - The defen­dant ap­pealed - The Ontario Court of Appeal allowed the appeal - The defen­dant always intended to defend - The defendant served a statement of defence and notice of intent to defend on the plaintiff, but failed to file them - There was no evidence that the defendant was seeking to delay the pro­ceedings - It could not be concluded that there was no defence on the merits - The defendant filed a letter of credit guarantee­ing full payment of the amount claimed (which was substantial) and costs.

Counsel:

David Tompkins, for the appellant;

Mark H. Arnold, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on January 28 and 29, 1998, by Robins and Catzman, JJ.A., and Lederman, J.(ad hoc), of the Ontario Court of Appeal. The following decision of the Court of Appeal was endorsed on the appeal record.