Royal Bank of Scotland plc v. Ship Kimisis III et al., (2001) 219 F.T.R. 161 (TD)

• Judge: Simpson, J.
• Court: Federal Court (Canada)
• Case Date: April 02, 2001
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (2001), 219 F.T.R. 161 (TD)

Royal Bk. v. Ship Kimisis III (2001), 219 F.T.R. 161 (TD)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2001] F.T.R. TBEd. MY.100

The Royal Bank of Scotland plc (plaintiff) v. The Owners and all others interested in the Ship "Kimisis III" and Madonna Navigation (Malta) Limited (defendants)

(T-38-99; 2001 FCT 307)

Indexed As: Royal Bank of Scotland plc v. Ship Kimisis III et al.

Federal Court of Canada

Trial Division

Simpson, J.

April 9, 2001.

Summary:

A ship was sold. One of the claimants applied for leave to file a document showing delivery of the necessaries it supplied to the ship, notwithstanding that the document had been specifically requested by the plaintiff a year earlier. The time for filing claim affidavits was fourteen months in the past. Further, the time for production of claim related documents, requested by other parties and claimants, as extended, expired nearly six months earlier.

A Prothonotary of the Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, in a decision reported 186 F.T.R. 300, refused to grant the claimant leave to file the supplementary affidavit of claim. The claimant moved to have the decision reversed.

The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, dismissed the motion.

Admiralty - Topic 8045

Practice - Actions in rem - Claims for necessaries - Time for - A ship was sold - One of the claimants applied for leave to file a document showing delivery of the necessaries it supplied to the ship, notwithstanding that the document had been specifically requested by the plaintiff a year earlier - The time for filing claim affidavits was fourteen months in the past - Further, the time for production of claim related documents, requested by other parties and claimants, as extended, expired nearly six months earlier - A prothonotary held that while the court may have jurisdiction to enlarge the time fixed for filing claims to the proceeds of sale of a ship (rule 492(2)), in this case it would be unfair to the other parties to allow the further material to be filed at such a late date - The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, refused to disturb the decision.

Counsel:

Pauline Gardikiotis, for the plaintiff;

Ellen Underhill, for the defendant, Proios Maritime S.A.;

Glenn Morgan, for the defendant, Tramp Oil & Marine.

Solicitors of Record:

Campney & Murphy, Vancouver, British Columbia, for the plaintiff;

Giaschi & Margolis, Vancouver, British Columbia, for the defendant, Proios Maritime S.A.;

Davis & Company, Vancouver, British Columbia, for the defendant, Tramp Oil & Marine.

This motion was heard in Vancouver, British Columbia, on April 2, 2001, before Simpson, J., of the Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, who delivered the following judgment on April 9, 2001.