Abitibi-Price Sales Corp. v. Sambeek ( The )
T-1270-97
Dubé J.
14/10/98
8 pp.
Appeals from prothonotary's order granting 6-month extension to plaintiffs to serve statement of claim on defendant vessel Bontegracht, setting aside warrant issued against vessel, ordering plaintiffs to return to defendants letter of undertaking issued by them to prevent arrest of vessel, condemning plaintiffs to pay costs of motion at maximum rate provided under Tariff B, Column IV and, finally, otherwise dismissing defendant's motion-Appeals dismissed-Considering rr. 481(1) and 482(1), warrant for arrest cannot validly be issued when statement of claim no longer valid-Prothonotary therefore did not err in law when he set aside warrant of arrest-Prothonotary also right in ordering plaintiffs to return letter of undertaking to defendants as letter reserved defendants' right to challenge plaintiffs' right to arrest vessel and also provided undertaking would expire if plaintiffs' right to arrest Bontegracht eventually denied-Special costs: prothonotary's decision may not be reviewed unless based on wrong principle of law or misapprehension of facts or unless raises questions vital to final issue of case: Canada v. Aqua-Gem Investments Ltd., [1993] 2 F.C. 425 (C.A.)-Herein, well within prothonotary's discretion to award costs as did on basis letter of undertaking obtained under duress while statement of claim had expired-Prothonotary's conclusion plaintiffs had taken reasonable means to track vessel to serve statement of claim matter of appreciation of fact and open for prothonotary to come to that decision-Properly held costs for motion for extension of time be borne by plaintiffs-Federal Court Rules, 1998, SOR/98-106, rr. 481(1), 482(1).