Saskatchewan Wheat Pool v. Hawryluk et al., 2000 SKQB 582

• Judge: M-E. Wright, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: December 19, 2000
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: 2000 SKQB 582;(2000), 204 Sask.R. 255 (QB)

Sask. Wheat Pool v. Hawryluk (2000), 204 Sask.R. 255 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2001] Sask.R. TBEd. JA.026

Saskatchewan Wheat Pool (plaintiff) v. Bonnie Hawryluk and Julia Yakubchuk (defendants)

(1996 Q.B.G. No. 871; 2000 SKQB 582)

Indexed As: Saskatchewan Wheat Pool v. Hawryluk et al.

Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial Centre of Prince Albert

M-E. Wright, J.

December 19, 2000.

Summary:

Saskatchewan Wheat Pool (SWP) applied for leave to summarily enter final judgment against a guarantor. The guarantor argued that the guarantee was void under s. 31(2) of the Saskatchewan Farm Security Act because she did not personally attend before the notary public to acknowledge the guarantee nor sign it in his presence.

The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench granted summary judgment.

Guarantee and Indemnity - Topic 180

The contract - Form - Notarial certificate -Validity or regularity of - Saskatchewan Wheat Pool (SWP) applied for leave to summarily enter final jud­gment against a guarantor - The guaran­tor argued that the guarantee was void under s. 31(2) of the Saskatchewan Farm Secur­ity Act because she did not per­sonally attend before the notary public to complete the certificate acknowledging the guarantee nor sign the certificate in his presence - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench rejected the argument and granted sum­mary judgment - The certifi­cate was com­plete and regular on its face and accepted in good faith by SWP - Therefore, it con­stituted conclusive proof that there had been compliance with s. 31(1) of the Act.

Guarantee and Indemnity - Topic 2517

Discharge and other defences of surety - General - Noncompliance with guarantee legislation - [See Guarantee and Indem­nity - Topic 180 ].

Cases Noticed:

Bombardier Credit Ltd. v. Kostuchuk et al. (1994), 123 Sask.R. 89; 74 W.A.C. 89 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 7].

Agricultural Credit Corp. of Saskatchewan v. Path Head Farms Ltd. et al. (1994), 121 Sask.R. 81 (Q.B.), dist. [para. 9].

Pensionfund Properties Ltd. v. Giblin (R.K.) & Associates Ltd., Giblin and Sanderlin (1984), 55 A.R. 345; 32 Alta. L.R.(2d) 187 (Q.B.), affd. (1986), 61 Alta. L.R.(2d) 1ii (C.A.), appld. [para. 11].

Alberta v. Ronsdale Construction Inc., Harrison, Lennox and Lonsdale (1984), 58 A.R. 115 (Q.B. Master), appld. [para. 12].

Credit Foncier Trust Co. v. Flom et al. (1985), 64 A.R. 282 (Q.B.), appld. [para. 12].

Teachers' Investment and Housing Co-operative v. S.H. Properties Ltd. (1984), 55 A.R. 241 (Q.B.), appld. [para. 13].

Caisse Populaire de Morinville Savings and Credit Union Ltd. v. Lambert (1984), 58 A.R. 113; 40 Alta. L.R.(2d) 206 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 13].

Royal Bank of Canada v. Highfield Corp. et al. (1991), 123 A.R. 235 (Q.B.), appld. [para. 13].

Hongkong Bank of Canada v. 414577 Alberta Ltd. and Fife (1995), 167 A.R. 321 (Q.B. Master), appld. [para. 13].

Statutes Noticed:

Saskatchewan Farm Security Act, S.S. 1988-89, c. S-17.1, sect. 31 [para. 8].

Counsel:

Y.M. Pedersen, for the plaintiff;

R.J. Mills, Q.C., for the defendants.

This application was heard before M-E. Wright, J., of the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial Centre of Prince Albert, who delivered the following fiat on December 19, 2000.