Précis: A law firm was entitled to interplead disputed funds notwithstanding that the Federal Court had ordered the funds paid to one of the claimants.
Full SummaryLeo Ocean S.A. v. Westshore Terminals Limited Partnership, 2015 FC 130, 2015 FCA 282
Précis: The Federal Court of Appeal held that there was sufficient evidence to determine if the claim was one of pure economic loss and referred the matter back to the trial division for a decision.
Full SummaryRoots v. HMCS Annapolis, 2015 FC 1339
Précis: Repeated non-compliance with court orders and directions resulted in dismissal of the action for delay.
Full SummaryFingad Shipping Ltd. v. Ningbo Arts & Crafts Imp & Exp. Co. Ltd., 2015 FC 851
Précis: The court applied issue estoppel and struck an in rem action on the grounds that a French court had previously determined the owner at the time of the commencement of the action was not the same as at the time the cause of action arose.
Full SummaryAllchem Industries Industrial v. CMA CGM Florida (Vessel), 2015 FC 558
PrĂ©cis: The court held that service of a statement of claim on a freight forwarder, who sometimes acted as agent for the defendant and who was identified as an agent on the defendant’s website, was valid service.
Full SummaryLF Centennial Pte. Ltd. v. TRLU7228664 et al (Containers), 2015 FC 214
Précis: An in rem plaintiff has no right to commence proceedings and arrest in Federal Court when there are ongoing insolvency proceedings in a provincial superior court and an outstanding order under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act staying all proceedings.
Full SummaryHarry Sargeant III v. Al-Saleh, 2014 FCA 302
Précis: The Federal Court of Appeal held that a foreign fraud judgment in a non-maritime matter could not support a claim in rem and was outside the jurisdiction of the Federal Court.
Full SummaryBBC Chartering Carriers GmBH & Co. KG v. Jindal Steel & Power Limited, 2014 FC 1205
Précis: The Federal Court refused to set aside an arrest where the underlying claim was by a charterer for demurrage. The court also held that time limited security to obtain the release of an arrest was not acceptable.
Full SummaryWestshore Terminals Limited v. Leo Ocean S.A. (The Cape Apricot), 2014 FC 136, 2014 FCA 231
Précis: The Federal Court of Appeal held that a letter of undertaking given to secure the release of a vessel from arrest was valid and binding and further held that s. 43(8) of the Federal Courts Act did not permit the arrest of multiple vessels.
Full SummaryCoastal Float Camps Ltd. v. Jardine Lloyd Thompson Canada Inc., 2014 FC 906
PrĂ©cis: The Federal Court refused to strike a claim for negligence against a marine broker as it was not “plain and obvious” the court was without jurisdiction.
Full Summary