Canaccede International Management Ltd. v. Suttles Date:, 2012 BCPC 291

Citation: Canaccede International Management Ltd. v. Suttles Date: 20120820 2012 BCPC 0291 File No: 1134507 Registry: Vancouver IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA BETWEEN: CANACCEDE INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT LTD. CLAIMANT AND: DUNCAN SUTTLES DEFENDANT SUPPLEMENTARY REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE HONOURABLE JUDGE N.N. PHILLIPS Counsel for the Claimant: A. Chim Appearing in person: D. Suttles

Place of Hearing: Vancouver , B.C. Date of Hearing: June 18, 2012 Date of Judgment: August 20, 2012 [ 1 ] On July 6, 2012, the Court issued reasons for judgment following a trial held in this case on June 22, 2012. At paragraphs 45 and 46 of the judgment, the Court stated: Thus, although the Plaintiff failed to comply with the legislation, I find Suttles is still obligated to pay to Canaccede the MBNA debt they purchased. The amount assigned to Canaccede will include contractual interest at least up to March 11, 2009, the effective date of the sale of the debt.

In terms of any contractual interest from that date forward, I invite counsel to make further submissions on entitlement. Unless counsel are able to work out terms of settlement on their own in light of the Court’s ruling relating to compliance with the legislation, I will also receive submissions on what damage or loss (pursuant to s. 171) Suttles suffered due to Canaccede’s contraventions of the Act or Regulations .

The Defendant’s loss claim should recognize the prohibition on collecting in the Small Claims Court costs relating to legal fees incurred in pursuing a claim and the fact that the Director could have been asked to prosecute the matter on his behalf. Any submissions from counsel on these issues are to be made in writing and provided to the Court by August 10, 2012. [ 2 ] The Defendant, who was represented at trial, filed his own written submission.

In his material, the Defendant asked the Court to re-visit issues addressed in the July 6 th judgment and make additional substantive rulings, something I find would be improper for the Court to do. The Defendant also asked the Court to “escalate the matter to the Supreme Court” to address his counterclaim for declaratory relief.

The Court does not have the jurisdiction to transfer the matter to the Supreme Court at this stage and it would be inappropriate to do so. [ 3 ] Regarding the issue of contractual interest, the Defendant submitted that in the case of an assignment of debt, it would be improper for the creditor to be able to accumulate contractual interest over time.

Suttles submitted that contractual interest should not attach after the date notice of the assignment was given (or should have been given) to him. [ 4 ] The Defendant made no submission on what damage or loss he suffered, if any, due to Canaccede’s contraventions of the Act or Regulations. The evidence at trial did not establish that Suttles had suffered any loss as a result of the Claimant’s conduct other than to pay money toward the debt, something he was obligated to do.

Thus the Court will not make an order to offset the amount of the judgment granted to Canaccede on July 6 th . [ 5 ] In its’ submission on the issue of contractual interest, Canaccede argued that contractual interest should accrue, at a minimum, up to the date the last credit card statement was issued by MBNA to the Defendant (June 1, 2009). The Claimant submitted that the Defendant had agreed, by applying for and using the credit card, that he would be obligated to pay contractual interest, something Suttles did not dispute at trial.

However, given the delay in providing Suttles with notice of the assignment and the details of the outstanding debt, I find it would be unfair to order that contractual interest apply after the date the last account was given to the Defendant by MBNA. [ 6 ] Accordingly, I find it appropriate in the circumstances to order Suttles to pay contractual interest up to the date of the last account statement issued on June 1 st , 2009. The principal amount plus interest to that date is $24,991.56.

Canaccede is entitled to interest pursuant to the Court Order Interest Act from June 2, 2009. [ 7 ] Finally, the Claimant asked the Court to amend the style of cause from Canaccede International Management Ltd. to Canaccede International Acquisitions Ltd. Counsel for the Claimant advised that the proper related company to be named as Claimant in this case was discovered after the court mediation session. The amendment sought is with the consent of both of the companies.

An amended Notice of Claim was submitted to the registry for filing in May 2011 however, for reasons unknown, it was not filed. [ 8 ] Counsel for the Claimant provided authority for the proposition that the Court has jurisdiction to substitute one party for another following issuance of reasons for judgment but before entry of the final judgment.

Having reviewed the Claimant’s materials on point, I am satisfied the Court is not functus having yet filed the final judgment in this case and that the matter remains “pendent lite”. [ 9 ] The amendment is not prejudicial to the Defendant given that the case is not statute barred and, as such, Canaccede International Acquisitions Ltd. could commence another law suit against Suttles in order to address the matter if it wished. Neither Suttles nor his counsel raised the issue of the naming of the Plaintiff corporation at trial.

Amending the style of cause is appropriate at this time in order to enable the court to bring to a conclusion all outstanding issues between the parties without resort to further use of court resources. [ 10 ] Accordingly, the Court grants the application brought by the Claimant to amend the style of cause as set out herein. The Claimant is entitled to contractual interest on the debt to June 1, 2009 and interest thereafter pursuant to the Court Order Interest Act. The Claimant is also entitled to its filing and service fees.

I direct that the case now be set for a payment hearing on the first available date unless prior to that court date the parties are able to come to an agreement for payment of the judgment debt.

______________________ N. N. Phillips Provincial Court Judge