2013 QCCA 1447, 2013 QCCA 1447

Source: Court of Appeal of Québec

Jurisdiction: Quebec

Citation: 2013 QCCA 1447

Opinion

Coopers & Lybrand c. RSM Richter inc. 2013 QCCA 1447 COUR D'APPEL CANADA PROVINCE DE QUÉBEC GREFFE DE MONTRÉAL No: 500-09-023631-138 et 500-09-023632-136 (500-05-057234-005) PROCÈS-VERBAL D'AUDIENCE DATE: Le 21 août 2013 L’HONORABLE YVES-MARIE MORISSETTE, J.C.A. No: 500-09-023631-138

PARTIE REQUÉRANTE AVOCATS COOPERS & LYBRAND PRICEWATHERHOUSECOOPERS LLP Me Serge Gaudet HEENAN BLAIKIE SENCRL-SRL Me Sylvain Lussier Me Carine Bouzaglou OSLER, HOSKIN & HARCOURT, S.E.N.C.R.L./S.R.L.

PARTIE INTIMÉE AVOCATS RSM RICHTER INC. Me Avram Fishman Me Mark E. Meland FISHMAN FLANZ MELAND PAQUIN S.E.N.C.R.L. PARTIES MISES EN CAUSE AVOCATS

REPUBLIC NATIONAL BANK OF NEW YORK (CANADA), (formerly ''Bank Leumi Le- Israel'') CREDIT UNION CENTRAL OF SASKATCHEWAN B.C. CENTRAL CREDIT UNION REPUBLIC NATIONAL BANK OF NEW YORK (CANADA), (formerly ''Bank Hapoalim Canada'') BANCA COMMERCIALE ITALIANA OF CANADA BANQUE NATIONALE DE PARIS CANADA THE ESTATE OF THE LATE PETER N. WIDDRINGTON ADELAIDE CAPITAL CORPORATION BANKGESELLSCHAFT BERLIN AG ERSTE (formerly ''Girocredit Bank Aktiengesellschaft Der Sparkassen) BANK IN LIECHTENSTEIN BANCA UNIONE DI CREDITO ARAB BANKING CORPORATION DAUS & CO AIB CAPITAL MARKETS Plc BANCO ALEMAN PLATINA S.A.

BANQUE INTERNATIONALE A LUXEMBOURG S.A. BAYERISCHE LANDESBANK GIRONZENTRALE AND BANKHAUS AUFHAUSER BHF-BANK AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT DEUTSCHE GENOSSENSCHAFTSBANK DEUTSCHE SIEDLUNGS- Und LANDESRENTENBANK FRANKFURTER BANKGESELLSCHAFT GEORG HAUCK & SOHN BANKIERS KGaA IBERO PLATINA BANK AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT BANKHAUS HERMANN LAMPE KG MERCK FINCK & CO. PRIVATE BANKERS METALLBANK GmbH SAL OPPENHEIM JR. & CIE. KGaA BAYERISCHE VEREINSBANK A.G.(UNION BANK OF BAVARIA) NEW YORK BRANCH Me Avram Fishman Me Mark E. Meland FISHMAN FLANZ MELAND PAQUIN S.E.N.C.R.L.

REQUÊTE DE LA DÉFENDERESSE COOPERS & LYBRAND POUR PERMISSION D'APPELER (Art. 26, 494 et 511 C.p.c. ) No: 500-09-023632-136

PARTIE REQUÉRANTE AVOCAT PRICEWATHERHOUSECOOPERS LLP COOPERS & LYBRAND Me Sylvain Lussier Me Carine Bouzaglou OSLER, HOSKIN & HARCOURT, S.E.N.C.R.L./S.R.L. Me Serge Gaudet HEENAN BLAIKIE SENCRL-SRL

PARTIE INTIMÉE AVOCAT RSM RICHTER INC. Me Avram Fishman Me Mark E. Meland FISHMAN FLANZ MELAND PAQUIN S.E.N.C.R.L. PARTIES MISES EN CAUSE AVOCATS

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL (Art. 29, 494 et 511 C.p.c. ) Greffière: Asma Berrak Salle: RC.18 AUDITION 14 h 05 : Début de l’audition. Identification des procureurs. 14 h 05 : Argumentation de Lussier. 14 h 09 : Intervention de Me Gaudet. 14 h 10 : Suite de l'argumentation de Me Lussier. 14 h 51 : Argumentation de Me Gaudet. 14 h 55 : Argumentation de Me Fishman. 15 h 39 : Réplique de Me Gaudet, 15 h 45 : Suspension de la séance. 15 h 59 : Reprise de la séance. 15 h 59 : Jugement-voir page 3. 16 h 06 : Fin de l'audition.

Asma Berrak Greffière JUGEMENT [ 1 ] The central issue here, as it is forcefully formulated by the respondent, is the failure of the petitioners to raise a timely declinatory exception, ratione personae , when they challenged the jurisdiction, ratione materiae , of the Bankruptcy Division of the Superior Court to hear and decide the respondent’s claim against them. By reason of this failure, the petitioners, according to the respondent, attorned to the jurisdiction of the Civil Division of the Superior Court.

It is now too late to question it. [ 2 ] The central issue here, as it is equally forcefully presented by the petitioners, is that they could not make an argument based on art. 3148 C.c.Q. before the case had been properly remitted to the Civil Division of the Superior Court. [ 3 ] For the respondent, the judgment of the Court of Appeal which ordered the transfer from one division to the other resolved the jurisdictional dispute and barred the petitioners from raising a fresh declinatory exception.

For the petitioners, this judgment did nothing of the sort. [ 4 ] These issues, as well as the others raised by the petitioners in their motions, merit in my opinion a review by a panel of the Court. [ 5 ] The motions are therefore granted, costs to follow the outcome of the appeal.

THEREFORE, THE UNDERSIGNED: [7] ORDERS the suspension of proceedings in first instance; [8] DEFERS the file to the Master of the rolls to determine the date of a hearing of 120 minutes in duration (60 minutes each parties); [9] ORDERS the appellants, after having served a copy upon the respondent, to file in the office of the Court, no later than October 15, 2013 , five copies of a written argument not exceeding 30 pages, of the exhibits that would normally have made up schedules I, II and III of their factum and of their authorities; [10] ORDERS the respondent, after having served a copy upon the appellant, to file in the office of the Court, no later than November 15, 2013 , five copies of a written argument not exceeding 30 pages, of its supplementary documents and of its authorities; [11] ORDERS the parties to present their written arguments on 21.5 cm X 28 cm (8 ½ X 11 in.) paper, with line spacing of at least 1.5 lines (except in the case of quotations, which must be single-spaced and indented), and the computer-prepared text shall be in 12- point type, with no more than 12 characters per 2.5 cm, the use of the font ARIAL-12 being strongly recommanded; [12] ORDERS that the documents filed by the parties carry a continuous pagination or tabs, a front cover and a general table of contents; [13] THE WHOLE , costs to follow.

YVES-MARIE MORISSETTE, J.C.A.

Loading document…