PRACTICE |
Stay of Proceedings |
White v. E.B.F. Manufacturing Ltd.
T-836-01
2001 FCT 713, Dubé J.
27/6/01
7 pp.
Defendants seeking stay of proceedings on ground claim being proceeded with in another court--On May 9, 2000 plaintiff commencing proceedings in Supreme Court of Nova Scotia, claiming unpaid royalties pursuant to licence agreement--On May 17, 2001 commencing these proceedings, seeking unpaid royalties, damages, declaration licence agreement null and void for non-payment and injunction restraining defendants from continuing to manufacture, sell braided electrical fencing product--Federal Court Act, s. 50(1)(a) providing Court may in its discretion stay proceedings in any cause or matter on ground claim being proceeded with in another Court or jurisdiction--Criteria established by case law to determine whether such stay should be granted, abridged and assembled as follows: (1) would continuation of action cause prejudice or injustice (not merely inconvenience or extra expense) to defendant; (2) would stay work injustice to plaintiff; (3) onus on party seeking stay to establish first two conditions met; (4) grant or refusal of stay within discretionary power of judge; (5) power to grant stay may only be exercised sparingly and in clearest of cases; (6) are facts alleged, legal issues involved, and relief sought similar in both actions; (7) what are possibilities of inconsistent findings in both courts; (8) until risk of imminent adjudication in two different forums, Court should be very reluctant to interfere with any litigant's right of access to another jurisdiction; (9) priority ought not necessarily be given to first proceeding over second, or vice versa--Motion dismissed--Continuation of this action would not cause prejudice to defendants--Possible extra expense, inconvenience remedied by way of costs--Not obvious case favouring stay--Two egregious differences between Nova Scotia proceedings and Federal Court proceedings: three defendants added to federal case and plaintiff now seeking injunctive relief on national scale in federal action--Even if factual situation, some of legal issues similar in both actions, relief sought different--No risk of imminent adjudication in two different forums--Premature to interfere with plaintiff's right of access to Federal Court--Presumed plaintiff now more interested in seeking national injunction and will conduct himself accordingly--Federal Court Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. F-7, s. 50.