2023 QCCA 1167, 2023 QCCA 1167

Lande c. Feldman 2023 QCCA 1167 COURT OF APPEAL CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC REGISTRY OF MONTREAL No.: 500-09-030676-233 ( 500-11-058629-201 ) MINUTES OF HEARING DATE: September 15, 2023 THE HONOURABLE MARIE-JOSÉE HOGUE, J.A. APPLICANT COUNSELS Irwin Lande Mtre GUILLAUME LABERGE Mtre ROXANE FORTIN-LECOMPTE ( Lavery De Billy ) RESPONDENT COUNSELS Glenn J. Feldman Mtre MIGUEL EDUARDO VARGAS MONROY Me MÉLISSA LEMIEUX ( Feldman Avocats ) IMPLEADED PARTIES COUNSEL

Société en commandite Montréal Media & divertissement MONTREAL MEDIA ENTERTAINMENT BUILDING INC. IOANNIS HATZITHOMAS TYFOON INTERNATIONAL INC. ALLAN BERNSTEIN PIERRO HIRSCH MNP LTD. andrew feifer, in his capacity as liquidator to the estate of the late Sherri Lande Feifer ABSENTS AND UNREPRESENTED DESCRIPTION: Application de bene esse for leave to appeal from a judgment rendered in the course of the proceeding on July 10, 2023 , by the Honourable David R.

Collier of the Superior Court , District of Montréal . (Articles 31, para. 2 and 357 C.C.P .) Clerk at the hearing : Ariane Simard-Trudel Courtroom: RC-18 HEARING 9:38 Commencement of the hearing. Identification of counsel. Preliminary remarks by the judge. 9:40 Submissions by Mtre Fortin-Lecompte. 9:46 Discussion between the judge and Mtre Fortin-Lecompte. 9:52 Submissions by Mtre Vargas Monroy. 9:57 Discussion between the judge and Mtre Vargas Monroy. 10:10 Reply by Mtre Fortin-Lecompte. 10:15 Recess of the hearing. 14:00 Resumption of the hearing. BY THE JUDGE : Judgement – see page 4.

Conclusion of the hearing. Ariane Simard-Trudel, Clerk at the hearing JUDGMENT [ 1 ] The judgment was technically rendered in the course of proceedings and may be appealed with leave in accordance with the

second paragraph of

Article 31 C.C.P .

Leave will therefore be granted if it is demonstrated that the judgment determines “part of the dispute or causes irremediable injury to a party, including if it allows an objection to evidence.” In addition, the party seeking leave must demonstrate that the appeal is consistent with the principles of proportionality and of the proper administration of justice. [1] [ 2 ] In the circumstances of this case, I am of the opinion that the Applicant will not be able to reclaim the sums that were denied to him by the Superior court judgment and, as such, that the judgment is one that determines part of the dispute.

Furthermore, granting leave is not inconsistent with either the interest of justice or the principle of proportionality.

THEREFORE, THE UNDERSIGNED: [ 3 ] GRANTS Application de bene esse for leave to appeal a judgment rendered in the course of a proceeding ; [ 4 ] GRANTS leave to appeal the judgment of the Superior Court dated July 10, 2023; [ 5 ] ORDERS the appellant to file with the Court office, no later than October 30, 2023, five copies of a memorandum comprising an argument not exceeding 10 pages and the three schedules set out in ss. 51 and 58 R.C.A.Q.Civ.M. , after having notified a copy thereof to the parties having filed a representation or non-representation statement (ss. 55 para. 2 and 58 R.C.A.Q.Civ.M. ); [ 6 ] ORDERS the respondent to file with the Court office, no later than 45 days following the filing of the appellants argument, five copies of a memorandum comprising an argument not exceeding 10 pages and, if necessary, elements in addition to those in the appellant’s schedules (ss. 47 and 58 R.C.A.Q.Civ.M. ), after having notified a copy thereof to the appellant and to the parties having filed a representation or non-representation statement (ss. 55 para. 2 and 58 R.C.A.Q.Civ.M. ); [ 7 ] REMINDS the parties about the rule set out in art. 376 C.C.P. : 376.

The appeal lapses if the appellant does not file a brief or a memorandum within the time limit for filing. The appellate clerk issues a certificate of lapse of appeal, unless an appellate judge is seized of an application for an extension. A respondent or any other party that does not make a timely filing of its brief or memorandum is precluded from filing and cannot be heard at the hearing unless so authorized by the Court of Appeal. [ 8 ] REMINDS the parties that, in accordance with s. 13 R.C.A.Q.Civ.M. , they must send to the Court office a technological version of the paper version of their memoranda.

The preparation and transmission of this technological version are governed by the Chief Justice's Directive entitled "Rules Respecting the Preparation of the PDF Version of Pleadings, Briefs, Memoranda, Books of Authorities or Any Other Document" and the Clerk's Practice Direction No. 7 entitled "Transmission of the PDF Version of Certain Pleadings, Briefs, Memoranda and Other Documents by Means of the Digital Office of the Court of Appeal (DOCA)"; [ 9 ] REFERS the file to the Master of the Rolls for the scheduling of a hearing of 60 minutes, namely 30 minutes for the appellant and 30 minutes for the respondent. [ 10 ] THE WHOLE , legal costs to follow.

MARIE-JOSÉE HOGUE, J.A.