Hydro Mobile Inc. v. Bennu Innovation Inc., 2001 FCT 591

Date: 20010605

Docket: T-270-01

                                                                                           Neutral Citation: 2001 FCT 591

MONTREAL, QUEBEC, THIS 5^th DAY OF JUNE 2001

PRESENT:      RICHARD MORNEAU, ESQ., PROTHONOTARY

BETWEEN:

                                                    HYDRO MOBILE INC.

                                                                                                                                   Plaintiff

                                                                    AND

                                               BENNU INNOVATION INC.

                                                                     and

                                                    JEAN G. ROBILLARD

                                                                                                                             Defendants

Requête des défendeurs visant à obtenir :

1.         Une ordonnance en vertu de l'article 221(1) des Règles de la Cour fédérale (1998) radiant la déclaration dans sa totalité quant au défendeur ROBILLARD et rejetant l'action quant à cette partie;

           2.         Toute autre ordonnance que cette Honorable Cour jugera juste et utile de rendre;

           3.         Les dépens.

                                      REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER

RICHARD MORNEAU, ESQ., PROTHONOTARY:

[1]                In light of what was mentioned by this Court in the case of Painblanc v. Kastner et al. (1994), 58 C.P.R. (3d) 502, and the jurisprudence cited therein, in my opinion, it is plain and obvious that the allegations found in paragraphs 11 and 12 of the Statement of Claim do not disclose sufficient material facts to properly engage the liability of Jean G. Robillard as a personal defendant.

[2]                I therefore order the striking out of Jean G. Robillard as a party defendant to this action, subject to the right of the plaintiff to file and serve an amendment on or before July 5, 2001, or within such further period as the parties may agree, alleging material facts which would, if proven, establish liability on the part of Jean G. Robillard.

[3]                Based on the wording of rule 221(1)(a) and the comments made by the Federal Court of Appeal in Coca-Cola Ltd. v. Pardhan (1999), 85 C.P.R. (3d) 489, at 493, I do not believe that the fact that a defence and an affidavit of documents have been produced by Mr. Robillard is a bar to the motion herein.

[4]                Costs of this motion go to the Defendants.

Richard Morneau      

                                  Prothonotary

                                           FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA

                      NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

COURT NO.:

STYLE OF CAUSE:

T-270-01

HYDRO MOBILE INC.

                                                                         Plaintiff

AND

BENNU INNOVATION INC.

and

JEAN G. ROBILLARD

                                                                   Defendants

PLACE OF HEARING:Montreal, Quebec

DATE OF HEARING:June 4, 2001

REASONS FOR ORDER BY RICHARD MORNEAU, ESQ., PROTHONOTARY

DATE OF REASONS FOR ORDER:June 5, 2001

APPEARANCES:

SOLICITORS OF RECORD: