Williams (F.) Logging Co. et al. v. Roethel et al.
| Jurisdiction | British Columbia |
| Court | Court of Appeal (British Columbia) |
| Judge | Macfarlane, Ryan and Donald, JJ.A. |
| Citation | (1995), 58 B.C.A.C. 84 (CA) |
| Date | 02 March 1995 |
Williams Logging Co. v. Roethel (1995), 58 B.C.A.C. 84 (CA);
96 W.A.C. 84
MLB headnote and full text
F. Williams Logging Co. Ltd. and Margaret Forestry Ltd. (plaintiffs/respondents) v. Klaus Roethel and Roethel Resources Ltd. (defendants/appellants)
(V01821)
Indexed As: Williams (F.) Logging Co. et al. v. Roethel et al.
British Columbia Court of Appeal
Macfarlane, Ryan and Donald, JJ.A.
March 2, 1995.
Summary:
The defendant Roethel consented to judgment against him in the plaintiffs' action for losses suffered by his alleged maladmin-istration of their business and financial affairs. A Chambers judge subsequently ruled that the judgment debt survived Roethel's discharge from bankruptcy. Roethel appealed.
The British Columbia Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.
Bankruptcy - Topic 8983
Discharge of debtor - Liabilities not released by discharge - Acts of defalcation in fiduciary capacity - Section 178(1)(d) of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act provided that a discharge did not release a bankrupt from any debt or liability arising out of fraud, embezzlement, misappropriation or defalcation while acting in a fiduciary capacity - The defendant consented to judgment against him for defalcations related to his administration of the plaintiffs' business and financial affairs - The British Columbia Court of Appeal affirmed that the judgment debt survived the defendant's discharge from bankruptcy.
Cases Noticed:
Viking Well Services Ltd. v. Metrocan Leasing Ltd. (1988), 67 C.B.R.(N.S.) 278 (Alta. C.A.), not appld. [para. 4].
Smith v. Henderson et al. (1992), 10 B.C.A.C. 249; 21 W.A.C. 249; 64 B.C.L.R.(2d) 144 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 6].
Statutes Noticed:
Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. B-3, sect. 178(1)(d) [paras. 3-4, 6].
Counsel:
John McLean, for the respondent;
Robert C. Di Bella and Nicholas A. Mosky, for the appellant.
This appeal was heard in Victoria, British Columbia, before Macfarlane, Ryan and Donald, JJ.A., of the British Columbia Court of Appeal. The decision of the court was delivered orally by Donald, J.A., on March 2, 1995.
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Start Your 7-day Trial
-
Court Of Appeal Summaries (July 25, 2022 ' July 29, 2022)
...and Insolvency Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. B-3, s. 178(1)(e), Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 25.06(8), F. Williams Logging Co. v. Roethel (1995), 58 B.C.A.C. 84, Lawyers' Professional Indemnity Company v. Rodriguez, 2018 ONCA 178, McAteer v. Billes, 2007 ABCA 137, H.Y. Louie Co. Limited v. Bowick......
-
Mayer v Merchant Law Group LLP
...a trustee fails to fulfill their obligations with respect to the administration of the trust: F. Williams Logging Co. Ltd. v. Roethel (1995), 58 B.C.A.C. 84, 1995 CanLII 2606 (C.A.) at para. 6. The defendant did not aggressively contest that there was a proper cause of action pleaded in thi......
-
Louie (H.Y.) Co. v. Bowick
...(2005), 282 N.B.R.(2d) 61; 738 A.P.R. 61; 2005 NBCA 32, refd to. [paras. 40, 81]. Williams (F.) Logging Co. et al. v. Roethel et al. (1995), 58 B.C.A.C. 84; 96 W.A.C. 84; 32 C.B.R.(3d) 99 (C.A.), refd to. [paras. 42, Bourassa (Bankrupt), Re (2002), 312 A.R. 19; 281 W.A.C. 19; 2002 ABCA 205,......
-
Peterson v. Peterson, (1995) 178 A.R. 70 (CA)
...18]. Berthold v. MacLellan, [1994] A.J. No. 275 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 19]. Williams (F.) Logging Co. et al. v. Roethel et al. (1995), 58 B.C.A.C. 84; 96 W.A.C. 84; 32 C.B.R.(3d) 99 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 19]. Barnacle v. Barnacle, [1993] O.J. No. 1273 (Ont. Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 19......
-
Mayer v Merchant Law Group LLP
...a trustee fails to fulfill their obligations with respect to the administration of the trust: F. Williams Logging Co. Ltd. v. Roethel (1995), 58 B.C.A.C. 84, 1995 CanLII 2606 (C.A.) at para. 6. The defendant did not aggressively contest that there was a proper cause of action pleaded in thi......
-
Louie (H.Y.) Co. v. Bowick
...(2005), 282 N.B.R.(2d) 61; 738 A.P.R. 61; 2005 NBCA 32, refd to. [paras. 40, 81]. Williams (F.) Logging Co. et al. v. Roethel et al. (1995), 58 B.C.A.C. 84; 96 W.A.C. 84; 32 C.B.R.(3d) 99 (C.A.), refd to. [paras. 42, Bourassa (Bankrupt), Re (2002), 312 A.R. 19; 281 W.A.C. 19; 2002 ABCA 205,......
-
Peterson v. Peterson, (1995) 178 A.R. 70 (CA)
...18]. Berthold v. MacLellan, [1994] A.J. No. 275 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 19]. Williams (F.) Logging Co. et al. v. Roethel et al. (1995), 58 B.C.A.C. 84; 96 W.A.C. 84; 32 C.B.R.(3d) 99 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 19]. Barnacle v. Barnacle, [1993] O.J. No. 1273 (Ont. Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 19......
-
M.O.S. MortgageOne Solutions Ltd. v. Heidary
...to determine whether the consent constituted an admission of anything mentioned in s. 178(1)(e): F. Williams Logging Co. v. Roethel (1995), 58 B.C.A.C. 84, at para. 6. The motion judge was uniquely positioned to do so, given that he had also granted the consent judgment. In concluding that ......
-
Court Of Appeal Summaries (July 25, 2022 ' July 29, 2022)
...and Insolvency Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. B-3, s. 178(1)(e), Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 25.06(8), F. Williams Logging Co. v. Roethel (1995), 58 B.C.A.C. 84, Lawyers' Professional Indemnity Company v. Rodriguez, 2018 ONCA 178, McAteer v. Billes, 2007 ABCA 137, H.Y. Louie Co. Limited v. Bowick......