Stockbrugger Estate v. Wolfe Estate, Rachul and Sandstra Bros. Transport Ltd., (1987) 59 Sask.R. 96 (CA)

JudgeBayda, C.J.S., Vancise and Sherstobitoff, JJ.A.
CourtCourt of Appeal (Saskatchewan)
Case DateMay 13, 1987
JurisdictionSaskatchewan
Citations(1987), 59 Sask.R. 96 (CA);1987 CanLII 4901 (SK CA);[1987] 4 WWR 759;20 CPC (2d) 82;59 Sask R 96

Stockbrugger Estate v. Wolfe Estate (1987), 59 Sask.R. 96 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

Ronald Lauer, Executor of the Estate of Larry Dennis Stockbrugger (plaintiff/respondent) v. Fred Wolfe and Doug Wolfe, as Administrators Ad Litem of the Estate of Annie Wolfe, Glen Rachul and Sandstra Bros. Transport Ltd. (defendants/appellants)

(No. 9188)

Indexed As: Stockbrugger Estate v. Wolfe Estate, Rachul and Sandstra Bros. Transport Ltd.

Saskatchewan Court of Appeal

Bayda, C.J.S., Vancise and Sherstobitoff, JJ.A.

May 13, 1987.

Summary:

The plaintiff obtained an ex parte order adding Rachul and Sandstra Bros. Transport as defendants. Both defendants applied to set aside the order.

The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, in a decision reported in 53 Sask.R. 140, dismissed the application. The defendants appealed.

The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.

Practice - Topic 666

Parties - Adding parties - Adding defendants - Application of limitation periods - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal affirmed that since the enactment of s. 44(11) of the Queen's Bench Act, a plaintiff seeking to add a defendant after the expiry of a limitation period need now satisfy only two criteria: first, that the claim against the proposed defendant arose out of the same transaction or occurrence as the original claim and second, that the proposed defendant will suffer no actual prejudice.

Cases Noticed:

Walbaum and Walbaum v. G & R Trucking Ltd., [1983] 2 W.W.R. 622; 22 Sask.R. 22, not appld. [para. 1].

Weldon v. Neal (1887), 19 Q.B.D. 394, refd to. [para. 2].

Tannas v. Mosser, [1930] 1 W.W.R. 738; [1930] 4 D.L.R. 192; 24 Sask. L.R. 386, refd to. [para. 2].

Basarsky v. Quinlan, [1972] S.C.R. 380; [1972] 1 W.W.R. 303; 24 D.L.R.(3d) 720, refd to. [para. 2].

Statutes Noticed:

Queen's Bench Act, R.S.S. 1978, c. Q-1, sect. 44(11) [paras. 1-3, 5].

Counsel:

Mr. Gibbings, for the appellant;

Marilyn Scott, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard before Bayda, C.J.S., Vancise and Sherstobitoff, JJ.A., of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal. The decision of the court was delivered by Bayda, C.J.S., on May 13, 1987.

To continue reading

Request your trial
54 practice notes
  • Duke v. Vervaeck,
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
    • October 5, 2000
    ...450; 118 Sask.R. 128 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 10]. Stockbrugger Estate v. Wolfe Estate, Rachul and Sanstra Brothers Transport Ltd., [1987] 4 W.W.R. 759; 59 Sask.R. 96 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 10]. Walbaum and Walbaum v. G & R Trucking Ltd., [1983] 2 W.W.R. 622; 22 Sask.R. 22 (C.A.), refd ......
  • Global Aerospace Inc. v. Insurance Co. of the State of Pennsylvania et al., (2010) 359 Sask.R. 209 (CA)
    • Canada
    • Saskatchewan Court of Appeal (Saskatchewan)
    • August 31, 2010
    ...22; 144 D.L.R.(3d) 636 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 129]. Stockbrugger Estate v. Wolfe Estate, Rachul and Sandstra Bros. Transport Ltd., [1987] 4 W.W.R. 759; 59 Sask.R. 96 (C.A.), refd to. [para. James Ehmann, Q.C., and Amy Anderson, for the appellant, the Insurance Company of the State of Penns......
  • Meyers et al. v. Humboldt (Town), (1996) 142 Sask.R. 60 (QB)
    • Canada
    • Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
    • March 5, 1996
    ...22; 144 D.L.R.(3d) 636 (C.A.), consd. [para. 10]. Stockbrugger Estate v. Wolfe Estate, Rachul and Sandstra Brothers Transport Ltd. (1987), 59 Sask.R. 96; 20 C.P.C.(2d) 82 (C.A.), refd to. [para. Dusterbeck v. Beitel, [1988] 6 W.W.R. 669 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [para. 12]. Baker v. Brodner et......
  • Cameco Corp. v. Insurance Co. of the State of Pennsylvania et al., 2008 SKCA 54
    • Canada
    • Saskatchewan Court of Appeal (Saskatchewan)
    • December 7, 2007
    ...barred - [See Practice - Topic 712 ]. Cases Noticed: Stockbrugger Estate v. Wolfe Estate, Rachul and Sandstra Bros. Transport Ltd., [1987] 4 W.W.R. 759; 59 Sask.R. 96 (C.A.), consd. [paras. 25, 73]. K.M. v. H.M., [1992] 3 S.C.R. 6 ; 142 N.R. 321 ; 57 O.A.C. 321 ; 96 D.L.R.(4th) 289 (......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
28 cases
  • Duke v. Vervaeck,
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
    • October 5, 2000
    ...450; 118 Sask.R. 128 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 10]. Stockbrugger Estate v. Wolfe Estate, Rachul and Sanstra Brothers Transport Ltd., [1987] 4 W.W.R. 759; 59 Sask.R. 96 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 10]. Walbaum and Walbaum v. G & R Trucking Ltd., [1983] 2 W.W.R. 622; 22 Sask.R. 22 (C.A.), refd ......
  • Global Aerospace Inc. v. Insurance Co. of the State of Pennsylvania et al., (2010) 359 Sask.R. 209 (CA)
    • Canada
    • Saskatchewan Court of Appeal (Saskatchewan)
    • August 31, 2010
    ...22; 144 D.L.R.(3d) 636 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 129]. Stockbrugger Estate v. Wolfe Estate, Rachul and Sandstra Bros. Transport Ltd., [1987] 4 W.W.R. 759; 59 Sask.R. 96 (C.A.), refd to. [para. James Ehmann, Q.C., and Amy Anderson, for the appellant, the Insurance Company of the State of Penns......
  • Meyers et al. v. Humboldt (Town), (1996) 142 Sask.R. 60 (QB)
    • Canada
    • Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
    • March 5, 1996
    ...22; 144 D.L.R.(3d) 636 (C.A.), consd. [para. 10]. Stockbrugger Estate v. Wolfe Estate, Rachul and Sandstra Brothers Transport Ltd. (1987), 59 Sask.R. 96; 20 C.P.C.(2d) 82 (C.A.), refd to. [para. Dusterbeck v. Beitel, [1988] 6 W.W.R. 669 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [para. 12]. Baker v. Brodner et......
  • Cameco Corp. v. Insurance Co. of the State of Pennsylvania et al., 2008 SKCA 54
    • Canada
    • Saskatchewan Court of Appeal (Saskatchewan)
    • December 7, 2007
    ...barred - [See Practice - Topic 712 ]. Cases Noticed: Stockbrugger Estate v. Wolfe Estate, Rachul and Sandstra Bros. Transport Ltd., [1987] 4 W.W.R. 759; 59 Sask.R. 96 (C.A.), consd. [paras. 25, 73]. K.M. v. H.M., [1992] 3 S.C.R. 6 ; 142 N.R. 321 ; 57 O.A.C. 321 ; 96 D.L.R.(4th) 289 (......
  • 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