Servus Credit Union Ltd. v. Parlee, 2015 ABQB 700
| Court | Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada) |
| Case Date | November 05, 2015 |
| Citations | 2015 ABQB 700;[2015] A.R. TBEd. NO.052 |
Servus Credit Union Ltd. v. Parlee, [2015] A.R. TBEd. NO.052
MLB being edited
Currently being edited for A.R. - judgment temporarily in rough form.
Temp. Cite: [2015] A.R. TBEd. NO.052
Servus Credit Union Ltd. (plaintiff) v. Alfred Philip Parlee and Clara Vivian Parlee (defendants)
(1504 00261; 2015 ABQB 700)
Indexed As: Servus Credit Union Ltd. v. Parlee
Alberta Court of Queen's Bench
Judicial District of Grande Prairie
Schlosser, Master
November 5, 2015.
Summary:
Alfred and Clara Parlee's property was foreclosed upon by court order. The Parlees, represented by Alfred Parlee, sought to, inter alia, nullify the foreclosure order, relying on an Organized Pseudolegal Commercial Argument ("OPCA").
A Master of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the application. The court divided the application into two parts: (1) a Quo Warranto application to declare the foreclosure as null and void because it was made without jurisdiction; and (2) an application to reverse the foreclosure and return possession of the Parlee Lands to the Parlees because they had (over)satisfied the outstanding mortgage debt with a $1 million "PRIVATE INDEMNITY BOND - NON-NEGOTIABLE", or via other means in the July 20, 2015 Affidavit documents. The court rejected all the OPCA arguments. Further, the court held that Parlee could not represent his wife.
Administrative Law - Topic 5741
Judicial review - Quo warranto - When available - General - See paragraphs 34 to 45.
Contracts - Topic 1324
Formation of contract - Implied acceptance - From silence - See paragraph 38.
Courts - Topic 554.1
Judges - Powers - To control "organized pseudolegal commercial argument" litigants - See paragraphs 1 to 85.
Practice - Topic 35
Actions - Conduct of - General - Representation by non-lawyer - See paragraph 82.
Treaties - Topic 1601
Operation and effect - General - See paragraphs 63 and 64.
Counsel:
Dusten E. Stewart (Minsos Stewart Masson), for the plaintiff;
Alfred Philip Parlee, for the defendants.
This application was heard by Schlosser, Master, of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial District of Grande Prairie, who delivered the following decision on November 5, 2015.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Potvin (Re), 2018 ABQB 652
...in that manner. This rule has been then accepted in Canadian courts: Re Boisjoli, at paras 32-34; Servus Credit Union Ltd v Parlee, 2015 ABQB 700 at paras 65-68, 7 Admin LR (6th) 700; Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce v McDougald, at paras 35-37; Dove v Legal Aid Ontario, 2018 ONSC 17 at p......
-
Scotia Mortgage Corporation v. Landry, 2018 ABQB 951
...or “A4V”. Canadian courts have considered and consistently rejected A4V claims, including: Re Boisjoli; Servus Credit Union Ltd v Parlee, 2015 ABQB 700, 7 Admin LR (6th) 321; Bossé v Farm Credit Canada, 2014 NBCA 34, 419 NBR (2d) 1, leave to appeal to SCC refused, 36026 (11 December 2014); ......
-
Scotia Mortgage Corporation v Landry, 2018 ABQB 856
...and consistently rejected A4V claims, including: Re Boisjoli, 2015 ABQB 629, 29 Alta LR (6th) 334; Servus Credit Union Ltd v Parlee, 2015 ABQB 700, 7 Admin LR (6th) 321; Bossé v Farm Credit Canada, 2014 NBCA 34, 419 NBR (2d) 1, leave to appeal to SCC refused, 36026 (11 December 2014); Royer......
-
Royal Bank of Canada v Anderson,
...“units of space and time”. The WeRe Bank scheme is reviewed in detail in Servus Credit Union Ltd v Parlee, 2015 ABQB 700, where Master Schlosser concluded the WeRe Bank and WeRe Cheques were worthless and The first basic reason why the WeRe Cheque was not a payment is simply b......
-
Potvin (Re), 2018 ABQB 652
...in that manner. This rule has been then accepted in Canadian courts: Re Boisjoli, at paras 32-34; Servus Credit Union Ltd v Parlee, 2015 ABQB 700 at paras 65-68, 7 Admin LR (6th) 700; Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce v McDougald, at paras 35-37; Dove v Legal Aid Ontario, 2018 ONSC 17 at p......
-
Scotia Mortgage Corporation v. Landry, 2018 ABQB 951
...or “A4V”. Canadian courts have considered and consistently rejected A4V claims, including: Re Boisjoli; Servus Credit Union Ltd v Parlee, 2015 ABQB 700, 7 Admin LR (6th) 321; Bossé v Farm Credit Canada, 2014 NBCA 34, 419 NBR (2d) 1, leave to appeal to SCC refused, 36026 (11 December 2014); ......
-
Scotia Mortgage Corporation v Landry, 2018 ABQB 856
...and consistently rejected A4V claims, including: Re Boisjoli, 2015 ABQB 629, 29 Alta LR (6th) 334; Servus Credit Union Ltd v Parlee, 2015 ABQB 700, 7 Admin LR (6th) 321; Bossé v Farm Credit Canada, 2014 NBCA 34, 419 NBR (2d) 1, leave to appeal to SCC refused, 36026 (11 December 2014); Royer......
-
Royal Bank of Canada v Anderson,
...“units of space and time”. The WeRe Bank scheme is reviewed in detail in Servus Credit Union Ltd v Parlee, 2015 ABQB 700, where Master Schlosser concluded the WeRe Bank and WeRe Cheques were worthless and The first basic reason why the WeRe Cheque was not a payment is simply b......