2015 QCCA 533, 2015 QCCA 533

Marunchack (Succession de) c. Racki 2015 QCCA 533 COURT OF APPEAL CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC REGISTRY OF MONTREAL No: 500-09-025000-159 (500-17-070234-128) DATE: March 25, 2015 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE FRANÇOIS PELLETIER, J.A. PAUL VÉZINA, J.A. MARTIN VAUCLAIR, J.A. ESTATE OF THE LATE MYKHAYLO MARUNCHAK APPELLANT – Plaintiff v. MYROSLAW RACKI -and- JACQUES CHAPLEAU -and- FONDS D’ASSURANCE RESPONSABILITÉ PROFESSIONNELLE DE LA CHAMBRE DES NOTAIRES DU QUÉBEC RESPONDENTS - Defendants JUDGMENT [ 1 ] On December 17 2014, the Superior Court for the District of Montreal (the Hon. Mr.

Justice Louis Lacoursière) granted in part, with costs, the motion of the respondents to dismiss the “Avis de substitution de procureur” served by the appellant Zinoviy Andrukhiv and ordered the plaintiff, the Estate of the late Mykhalo Marunchak, to constitute a new attorney within a delay of ten days. [ 2 ] The appellant Mr. Andrukhiv appealed this judgment as of right and the respondents answered with a motion for

summary dismissal under article 501(1) and (2) of the Code of Civil Procedure . [ 3 ] For the following reasons, the Court is of the opinion that the motion should be granted and the appeal dismissed. A . The appeal is late. [ 4 ]

Article 494 of the Code of civil Procedure reads as follows:

494 . An application for leave to appeal in the cases contemplated in the second paragraph of

article 26 and in

article 511 must be presented by motion accompanied by a copy of the judgment and of the documents of the contestation, if they are not reproduced in the judgment. It must indicate the duration of the proof and hearing in first instance, the conclusions sought by the appellant and a detailed statement of the grounds which the appellant intends to set up. The detailed statement of the grounds must refer to the documentary evidence or the testimonies in respect of which the appellant claims that the judge in first instance committed a manifest error.

It must also state in what way the errors of law or fact found are significant to the point of invalidating the judgment in first instance. Upon presentation of the application, the judge may, where so justified by serious reasons, authorize the filing of an additional statement within the time he determines.

The motion must be served on the adverse party and filed with the office of the court within 30 days of the date of judgment or, in the case of an application for leave to appeal from a judgment ruling on a motion to quash a seizure before judgment, within 10 days of the date of judgment; it must be presented to a judge of the Court of Appeal as soon as possible. If the application is granted, the judgment authorizing the appeal shall stand for the inscription in appeal.

The clerk of appeals shall transmit a copy of the judgment without delay to the judge whose judgment is appealed from and to the office of the court in first instance; he shall also transmit a copy, without delay, to the parties or their attorneys. Every other appeal must be brought within 30 days of the date of judgment unless in the case of subparagraph 2 of the first paragraph of

article 26 a shorter time is prescribed in another Act. Such time limits are peremptory and their expiry extinguishes the right of appeal. However, if a party dies before the expiry of such time without having appealed, the time limit for appeal runs against his legal representatives only from the day when the judgment is served upon them, which may be done in accordance with the provisions of

article 133. The time limit for appeal runs against a party condemned by default only from the expiry of the time within which he could demand the revocation of the judgment. 494. La demande pour permission d'appeler, dans les cas visés au deuxième alinéa de l'article 26 et à l'article 511, est présentée par requête accompagnée d'une copie du jugement et des pièces de la contestation, si elles ne sont pas reproduites dans le jugement. Elle doit indiquer la durée de l'enquête et de l'audition en première instance, les conclusions recherchées par l'appelant et un énoncé détaillé des moyens qu'il prévoit utiliser.

L'énoncé détaillé des moyens doit faire référence à la preuve documentaire ou aux témoignages au sujet desquels le requérant prétend que le juge de première instance a manifestement erré. Il doit aussi énoncer en quoi les erreurs de droit ou de faits relevées sont déterminantes au point d'infirmer le jugement de première instance. Lors de la présentation de cette demande, le juge peut autoriser la production d'un énoncé supplémentaire dans le délai qu'il détermine, si des motifs sérieux le justifient. La requête doit être signifiée à la

partie adverse et produite au greffe dans les 30 jours de la date du jugement ou, lorsqu'il s'agit d'une requête pour permission d'appeler d'un jugement qui prononce sur la requête en annulation d'une saisie avant jugement, dans les 10 jours de la date de ce jugement; elle doit être présentée à un juge de la Cour d'appel aussitôt que possible. Si la demande est accordée, le jugement qui autorise l'appel tient lieu de l'inscription en appel.

Le greffier des appels transmet sans délai copie de ce jugement au juge qui a rendu le jugement frappé d'appel et au greffe du tribunal de première instance; il en transmet également copie, sans délai, aux parties ou à leurs procureurs. Tout autre appel doit être formé dans les 30 jours de la date du jugement à moins que, dans le cas du paragraphe 2 du premier alinéa de l'article 26, un délai plus court ne soit prévu dans une autre loi. Ces délais sont de rigueur et emportent déchéance. Toutefois, si une

partie décède avant l'expiration de ce temps et sans avoir appelé, le délai d'appel ne court contre ses représentants légaux que du jour où le jugement leur est signifié, ce qui peut être fait conformément à la disposition de l'article 133. Le délai d'appel ne court contre la

partie condamnée par défaut que de l'expiration du temps pendant lequel elle pouvait demander la rétractation du jugement. [ 5 ] In the present case, while the inscription has been filed within the 30-day delay, the service of same had not. Therefore, the expiry of this time limit extinguished any right of appeal that could otherwise have existed [1] . B. The appellant is not entitled to represent the Estate before the Court. [ 6 ] The appellant relies on

article 58 of the Code of Civil Procedure to claim the right to represent the Estate of the late Mykhaylo Marunchak.

[ 7 ] Taking for granted, for the sole purpose of discussion, that this provision is applicable, the facts underlying the appellant’s contention do not support his argument. The judgment appealed from rightly states, inter alia : [8] Whereas the Estate of the late Mykhaylo Marunchak consisted of three heirs; [9] Whereas Mr Andrukhiv claims to act for one of the heirs further to a power of attorney executed in the Ukraine; [10] Whereas this particular heir has since died; [11] Whereas Mr Andrukhiv also claims to represent all three heirs of the Estate; [12] Whereas

section 61 of the Code of Civil Procedure disqualifies Mr Andrukhiv from representing legal persons who form part of the Estate; C. The right to appeal exists only with leave [ 8 ] An appeal lies from such an interlocutory judgment only with leave granted by a judge of our Court. The appellant never satisfied this preliminary requirement. FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 9 ] GRANTS the Motion to dismiss with costs [ 10 ] DISMISSES the appeal with costs. FRANÇOIS PELLETIER, J.A. PAUL VÉZINA, J.A. MARTIN VAUCLAIR, J.A. Mr. Zinoviy Andrukhiv For Appellant Mtre Christian Azzam DONATI MAISONNEUVE For Respondents Date of hearing: March 9, 2015