Discovery - Admiralty Law

Webasto (Hagedorn) v. Shasta Equities Ltd. (The Helios), 2013 FC 101, 2015 FCA 135

In Admiralty Practice, Discovery on May 22, 2014 (Updated June 03, 2015)

Précis: The Federal Court of Appeal held that preliminary investigation reports were not privileged even though counsel had been retained.

Full Summary

Default Judgment - Discovery - Failure to Answer - Practice

CF Boatworks Inc. v. James, 2011 FC 1101

In Admiralty Practice on September 26, 2011 (Updated July 11, 2012)

In this matter the defendant’s statement of defence had been struck for failure to provide a list of documents or written answers to interrogatories. The plaintiff now brought this motion for default judgment. The Prothonotary noted that on a motion for default judgement there are two questions: is the defendant in default and is there evidence to support the plaintiff’s …

Full Summary

Coverage Advice - Discovery - Marine Insurance - Privilege

Universal Sales Limited v. Edinburgh Assurance Co. Ltd., 2009 FC 150

In Marine Insurance on February 12, 2009 (Updated July 06, 2012)

The plaintiffs (the insureds) sought indemnity from the defendants (the insurers) for a settlement payment made by the plaintiffs to the federal government related to the sinking and raising of the “Irving Whale”. The insurers denied coverage alleging the settlement was made without their consent contrary to the terms of the policy. In these applications the plaintiffs/insureds sought production of …

Full Summary

Discovery - Non-Parties

The Administrator of the Ship-Source Oil Pollution Fund v. The "Anangel Splendour",, 2006 FCA 212

In Admiralty Practice, Discovery on June 7, 2006 (Updated June 28, 2012)

This was an action by the Administrator of the Ship-Source Oil Pollution Fund to recover pollution clean-up costs it had paid to two claimants, QCM and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO), pursuant to the statutory scheme in the Marine Liability Act. The Defendant brought this motion for an order that the Administrator put forward as its discovery representatives …

Full Summary

Discovery - Examination of Non-Parties

Thyssenkrupp Materials NA Inc. v. The "Stewart Island", 2005 FC 23

In Admiralty Practice, Discovery on January 12, 2005 (Updated June 28, 2012)

The Plaintiff brought this application for leave to examine the Chief Engineer of the Defendant vessel under Rule 238 of the Federal Court Rules, 1998. The Prothonotary at first instance accepted that the Chief Engineer had relevant information and that his examination would not cause undue delay, inconvenience or expense but nevertheless denied the application on the grounds that the …

Full Summary

Contempt - Discovery - Implied Undertaking Rule

N.M. Patterson & Sons Limited v. The St. Lawrence Seaway Mgt. Corp., 2004 FCA 210

In Admiralty Practice, Discovery on May 28, 2004 (Updated June 28, 2012)

This was an appeal from a motion in which a solicitor was found in contempt of court for disclosing to the media information obtained on examination for discovery. The appeal was dismissed. This important case reminds practitioners that documents and information received through the discovery process are subject to an implied obligation of confidentiality. Such documents and information may not …

Full Summary

Discovery - Written and Oral Examination

Haylock et al. v. Norwegian Cruise Lines et al., 2003 FC 932

In Admiralty Practice, Discovery on July 29, 2003 (Updated June 28, 2012)

This was an application by the Defendant shipowner in two actions for an Order that examinations for discovery of the 16 Plaintiffs, all cruise ship medical officers claiming wages for overtime, take place by way of written examination and then by such oral examination as the Defendant may reasonably require. The Prothonotary acknowledged that this was not a usual approach …

Full Summary

Contempt of Court - Discovery - Failure to Provide Documents

Island Tug & Barge Ltd. v. The "99 Haedong Star", 2002 FCT 432

In Admiralty Practice, Discovery on April 15, 2002 (Updated June 28, 2012)

This case once again illustrates the dangers of failing to comply with court orders. The Prothonotary had ordered that the Defendants provide the Plaintiff with originals of various documents and that the Plaintiff’s surveyor be allowed to inspect the defendant vessel. The Defendants failed to provide all of the documents required and failed to allow the Plaintiff’s surveyor to conduct …

Full Summary

Discovery - Examination of a Non-Party

Bayside Towing Ltd. v. Canadian Pacific Railway, [2000] F.C.J. No. 1534

In Admiralty Practice, Discovery on August 22, 2000 (Updated June 29, 2012)

This was an application to examine a non-party for discovery pursuant to Rule 238 of the Federal Court Rules. The underlying action was a limitation action brought by the tug owner to limit its liability for damage done to a bridge owned by the Defendant. The Defendant brought this motion to examine an experienced tug boat operator who had transited …

Full Summary

Discovery - Production of Report -Privilege

B.C. Hydro & Power Authority v. The "CSL Cabo", 1999 CanLII 9212

In Admiralty Practice, Discovery on December 3, 1999 (Updated June 29, 2012)

This was a motion to compel production of a report prepared by the Plaintiff. The evidence established that the Plaintiff was requested to prepare the report by its counsel. Plaintiff’s counsel requested the report "for use in litigation". A later memo of the Plaintiff recorded that the report was required "for file and legal purposes". The Plaintiff claimed the report …

Full Summary

Page 1 of 2
1
2
→