2015 QCCA 1303, 2015 QCCA 1303

Goldwater Dubé inc. c. Nadler 2015 QCCA 1303 COURT OF APPEAL CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC REGISTRY OF MONTREAL No: 500-09-025384-157 (500-17-086828-152) MINUTES OF THE HEARING DATE: August 5, 2015 THE HONOURABLE NICHOLAS KASIRER, J.A. PETITIONER COUNSEL GOLDWATER DUBÉ INC. Mtre NICOLAS NADEAU-OUELLET ( Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt, S.E.N.C.R.L./s.r. ) RESPONDENT COUNSEL SANDY NADLER Mtre CLAUDE BENABOU ( Benabou Magli ) DESCRIPTION: Motion for leave to appeal from a judgment rendered on June 16, 2015, by the Honourable Madam Justice France Dulude of the Superior Court, District of Montreal (Art. 26, 494 C.C.P .) Clerk: Asma Berrak Courtroom: RC-18

HEARING 12 :02 Commencement of the hearing. Identification of counsel. Mtre Nadeau-Ouellet files his appearence. Judge’s comment regarding the documents sent by the petitioner and received at the Office of the Court on August 4, 2015. 12 :04 Submission by Mtre Nadeau-Ouellet. 12 :09 Comments by the Juge. 12 :11 Exchanges between the Judge and counsel. Submission by Mtre Benabou. 12 :13 Continuation of the exchanges between the Judge and counsel. 12 :14 BY THE JUDGE : Judgment-see page 3. 12 :16 Conclusion of the hearing.

Clerk BY THE JUDGE JUDGMENT [ 1 ] Counsel for the petitioner asks for a postponement of the motion for leave to appeal. The petitioner’s representative informed the undersigned, by letter sent to the registry on August 4, 2015, that she received a Consumer Proposal filed by the respondent under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act , dated July 2, 2015 (a French version is dated July 3), copies of which accompany her letter. She also forwarded the Report of Administrator on Consumer Proposal, a copy of a form 31 of a provable claim made on behalf of her client, and other correspondence with the Administrator.

These documents have been included in the file for the present proceedings. [ 2 ] Counsel for the petitioner asks for the postponement because he intends either to contest the legality of the Consumer Proposal or to ask the competent court for authorization to continue these proceedings. [ 3 ] The respondent does not contest the request for a postponement. [ 4 ] I respectfully express my regret that the parties did not inform the registry of these developments in a timely fashion. [ 5 ] I am of the view that the proper administration of justice dictates that a postponement be granted until September 11, 2015, at which time the motion for leave to appeal will be placed on the roll at 9:30 a.m before the sitting judge in chambers.

FOR THESE REASONS , the undersigned: [ 6 ] GRANTS petitioner’s motion for a postponement until September 11, 2015; [ 7 ] Without costs. NICHOLAS KASIRER , J.A.