Ontario Civil

Courts and Procedure

Creditors were granted extension of time to bring appeal 


Creditors were granted extension of time to bring appeal 

Legal services relating to divorce proceedings were rendered to bankrupt taxpayer by creditor DM from 2008 to 2010, and creditor ML Corp. from 2011 on. Canada Revenue Agency filed and registered tax lien in amount of $227,042 in 2010 based on re-assessments and obtained jeopardy order in 2013. Creditor MB Corp. made loan to bankrupt taxpayer to pay two execution creditors. Bankrupt taxpayer filed proposal under Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act in 2014. Creditors and revenue agency filed proofs of claim. Application judge dismissed creditors’ motions for solicitor’s liens and salvage lien in relation to services rendered or money lent to bankrupt taxpayers. Creditors brought applications for extension of time to file notice of appeal and for leave to appeal. Applications granted. Creditors were granted extension of time to bring appeal. As this was decision of Bankruptcy Court, creditors were to bring appeal within 10 days, as appeal to Court of Appeal lies under s. 193 of act, rather than under Rules of Civil Procedure. Creditors had bona fide intention to appeal before expiry of appeal period but misapprehended applicable rules, which explained delay. There would be no prejudice to responding parties in granting leave since funds were in court. Solicitor’s lien and charging order were form of property for purpose of s. 193(c) of act, so appeal was as of right since amounts exceeded $10,000. It was more than arguable that s. 193(c) of act was basis for court’s appeal jurisdiction and leave was not required. If leave were required, it would have been granted pursuant to s. 193(3) of act. 
Menzies Lawyers Professional Corp. v. Morton (Trustee of) (Jul. 27, 2015, Ont. C.A., P. Lauwers J.A., File No. CA M44416) Leave to appeal from 244 A.C.W.S. (3d) 494 was allowed.  256 A.C.W.S. (3d) 265.





cover image


Subscribers get early and easy access to Law Times.

Law Times Poll

Law Times reports that there is no explicit rule that lawyers in Ontario must be competent in the use of technology. Do you think there should be explicit rules spelling out the expectations of lawyers’ in terms of tech use in their practice?