Date: 20001024
Docket: T-387-98
MONTRÉAL, QUEBEC, THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2000
PRESENT: Mr. RICHARD MORNEAU, PROTHONOTARY
ACTION IN PERSONAM AGAINST ABTA SHIPPING COMPANY LIMITED
AND TRADE FORTUNE INC. S.A.
Between:
REMARLO EVANGELISTA NAPA
CHONA A. NAPA
CYRUS J. FERRAREN
CONCEPTION FERRAREN
PETER JULIAN EYMARD SORIANO
ALMA MOTILLA NOCES
MILAGROS JAVINES SANORJO
RITA SANORJO
EDWINA VIRAY ORBE
ANNA LIZA AGUDOS CALINGA-ON and
CONCHITA B. ORTEGA
Plaintiffs
AND
ABTA SHIPPING COMPANY LIMITED
and
TRADE FORTUNE INC. S.A.
Defendants
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
Mr. RICHARD MORNEAU, PROTHONOTARY:
[1] This is a motion by the plaintiffs in this matter and in file T-1344-98 to have certain undertakings fulfilled and to obtain a decision in their favour on certain objections by counsel for the respondents (similar entities in both cases) during the examination for discovery of the common representative of these entities, an examination that was held in Montréal from October 18 to 21, 1999.
[2] The plaintiffs are also asking that the said representative, Mr. Georgios Tattos, be ordered to reappear in Montréal at his own expense (subject to the costs following the outcome of the case), to answer the questions that were objected to as well as any additional questions consequent thereto or undertakings provided or to be provided.
[3] It is appropriate at this point to dispose of this possibility of re-examination. Although the defendants are opposed, I am of the opinion in the circumstances of the case -- including, inter alia, the fact that the initial examination was only adjourned and that a substantial number of documents have since been produced by the defendants -- that the order hereinbefore stipulated should go, prescribing some time for the holding of the said examination.
[4] It is hereby ordered, therefore, that Mr. Georgios Tattos appear again in Montréal at a specific date and place to be determined between the parties but before January 19, 2001, to answer any additional questions consequent to the undertakings provided or to be provided. Mr. Tattos will advance his own travel costs and these will eventually follow the outcome of the case.
File T-387-98
[5] In regard to the present case, T-387-98, it should be noted, first, that the plaintiffs' counsel withdrew the questions underlying objections O-1 to O-4. There will be no adjudication on those, therefore.
[6] In relation to objection O-8, it was agreed that, in reply to the question asked therein, the Court would note that the defendants state that they have no information as to the quantity of liquids and ballasts or in which compartments these liquids or ballasts were loaded before the departure of the vessel from Rotterdam, subject to expert evidence on either side as to the different locations of the liquids and ballasts aboard the vessel.
[7] In regard to undertakings U-36 and U-37, the defendants shall, on or before November 8, 2000, combine into a single list or reply the three replies provided so far and indicate therein whether this list or reply is exhaustive. This list or reply shall be sent to the plaintiffs within the same time period.
[8] In regard to the costs, counsel for the applicants made a strong claim for special costs on the motion under examination owing to the many difficulties he says he encountered in completing the examination, which dates from October 1999. I share this position only in part, and that is why this motion is allowed in part and the ordinary costs of this motion are awarded to the plaintiffs.
File T-1344-98
[9] In regard to Mr. Tattos' re-examination, it will follow the same instructions as those appearing in paragraph 4 above.
[10] As to the objections, for the reasons expressed by the defendants in their written submissions, objections O-4 to O-8 are upheld and the defendants need not answer those questions, therefore.
[11] As to objections O-1 and O-2 and undertakings U-8, U-11, U-12, U-15, U-26 and U-29, the questions underlying them will not have to be answered since in my opinion there is no allegation in the statement of claim now in the record -- and this applies to the plaintiffs in file T-387-98 -- that would enable them in some way to lift the corporate veil applying to the defendants and to examine the latters' representative concerning their shareholders or the real or fictitious nature of those shareholders.
[12] These objections or undertakings must therefore be considered irrelevant and in the nature of a fishing expedition.
[13] In regard to the applicable timetable for the continuation of this case and case T-1344-98, the parties will have to govern themselves as follows:
(a) Mr. Tattos' re-examination shall be held on or before January 19, 2001;
(b) The undertakings made during that examination shall be provided on or before March 2, 2001;
(c) Any motion to have objections decided shall be served and filed on or before April 2, 2001. Any future schedule will be established at the completion of that motion or through the filing by the parties of written representations within the same period, should such a motion not be filed.
[14] This reasons and this order will be placed as well in file T-1344-98.
Richard Morneau
Prothonotary
Certified true translation
Suzanne M. Gauthier, LL.L., Trad. a.
Federal Court of Canada
Trial Division
Date: 20001024
Docket: T-387-98
Between:
REMARLO EVANGELISTA NAPA
CHONA A. NAPA
CYRUS J. FERRAREN
CONCEPTION FERRAREN
PETER JULIAN EYMARD SORIANO
ALMA MOTILLA NOCES
MILAGROS JAVINES SANORJO
RITA SANORJO
EDWINA VIRAY ORBE
ANNA LIZA AGUDOS CALINGA-ON
and
CONCHITA B. ORTEGA
Plaintiffs
AND
ABTA SHIPPING COMPANY LIMITED
and
TRADE FORTUNE INC. S.A.
Defendants
REASONS FOR ORDER
AND ORDER
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET NO: T-387-98
STYLE: REMARLO EVANGELISTA NAPA
CHONA A. NAPA
CYRUS J. FERRAREN
CONCEPTION FERRAREN
PETER JULIAN EYMARD SORIANO
ALMA MOTILLA NOCES
MILAGROS JAVINES SANORJO
RITA SANORJO
EDWINA VIRAY ORBE
ANNA LIZA AGUDOS CALINGA-ON
and
CONCHITA B. ORTEGA
Plaintiffs
AND
ABTA SHIPPING COMPANY LIMITED
and
TRADE FORTUNE INC. S.A.
Defendants
PLACE OF HEARING: Montréal, Quebec
DATE OF HEARING: October 19, 2000
REASONS FOR ORDER OF RICHARD MORNEAU, PROTHONOTARY
DATED: October 24, 2000
APPEARANCES:
Laurent Fortier for the plaintiffs (file T-387-98)
Jean-François Bilodeau for the plaintiffs (file T-1344-98)
Mélanie Bernier
Jean-Marie Fontaine
Danièle Dion for the defendants
David Colford
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Stikeman, Elliott for the plaintiffs (file T-387-98)
Montréal, Quebec
Sproule, Castonguay, Pollack for the plaintiffs (file T-1344-98)
Montréal, Quebec
Brisset Bishop for the defendants
Montréal, Quebec
Email this Content