Vaughne Realty, 2012 NSSC 205

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Vaughne Realty

(2005) Limited v. Nelson, 2012 NSSC 205 Date: 20120711 Docket: Ken No. 326965 Registry: Kentville Between: Vaughne Realty

(2005) Limited - Limitee, a body corporate, and Vaughne Rentals Limited, a body corporate, Plaintiffs v. Raymond M. Nelson Defendant Judge: The Honourable Justice Glen G. McDougall Heard: May 8, 2012, in Halifax, Nova Scotia Counsel: Colin D. Bryson, Q.C. for the plaintiffs Randall P.H.

Balcome, for the defendant By the Court : [ 1 ] The plaintiffs in their Notice of Motion seek an order for disclosure under Civil Procedure Rule 15.07 to specifically: 1) Produce all documents and emails relating [sic] the Defendant obtaining property insurance for the Plaintiff, Vaughne Rentals Limited, from Lloyds Underwriters through Goguen Champlain Insurance of Dieppe, New Brunswick; 2) Request that Goguen Champlain Insurance of Dieppe, New Brunswick produce all documents and emails relating the Defendant obtaining property insurance for the Plaintiff Vaughne Rentals Limited from Lloyds Underwriters through Goguen Champlain Insurance of Dieppe, New Brunswick; and 3) Provide Goguen Champlain Insurance of Dieppe, New Brunswick with written authorization to speak to Richard LeBlanc and his lawyer concerning the Defendant obtaining property insurance for the Plaintiff Vaughne Rentals Limited from Lloyds Underwriters through Goguen Champlain Insurance of Dieppe, New Brunswick. [ 2 ] The defendant, through his counsel, states that full disclosure of the information sought has already been made.

There is

nothing else within his possession and control that has not already been provided and to grant a further order would be redundant. [ 3 ] The defendant has also refused to provide written authorization to allow representatives of Goguen Champlain Insurance of Dieppe, New Brunswick to speak to Richard LeBlanc or his lawyer despite the fact that Richard LeBlanc either owns outright or otherwise controls 50 percent of the shares of Vaughne Rentals Limited.

The reason given for this refusal is a fear that Richard LeBlanc will do or say something that could cause the insurers, Lloyds Underwriters, to cancel the existing insurance on certain properties owned by Vaughne Rentals Limited. Apparently the level of mistrust that has developed between these two former business partners has reached rock bottom. Decision [ 4 ] As indicated earlier counsel for the defendant has stated that full disclosure has been made. If that is, indeed, the case there is little point in ordering a party to do what he says has already been done.

There is nothing to prevent this from being further explored during discovery of the defendant. I accept the representations of counsel and, in so doing, the Court relies on the truthfulness of his client. If the defendant is not being forthright in having this position conveyed to the Court then he could face stiff and severe sanctions for contempt should it later be shown that he has intentionally mislead the Court. For now, I will accept the representations of his counsel. [ 5 ] As for ordering the defendant to provide written authorization to allow representatives of Goguen Champlain Insurance to speak to Mr.

LeBlanc or his counsel, I am reluctant to involve the Court in the day-to-day operations of the company to this degree. It is open to the plaintiffs to obtain a discovery subpoena (non-party) under Civil Procedure Rule 18.05 by providing the required representations and undertakings set out in sub-section (2) of that Rule. A representative of Goguen Champlain Insurance can be subpoenaed for discovery purposes using this Rule. [ 6 ] The motion is, therefore, dismissed. Costs will be addressed once I receive the written submissions of counsel based on the results of all the motions heard or advanced by each side.

Counsel have thirty (30) days from the date of release of these decisions to do so. McDougall, J.