PRACTICE |
Stay of Proceedings |
Always Travel Inc. v. Air Canada
T-757-03
2003 FCT 707, Hugessen J.
4/6/03
10 pp.
Motion by Air Canada to stay proceedings, responsive motion by plaintiffs seeking declaration order of Ontario Superior Court of Justice has no impact on proceedings so as to stay them, similar motion by plaintiffs in respect of another order made by Justice Farley in Ontario Superior Court of Justice--Proposed class action brought by plaintiffs seeking to represent class of travel agencies in Canada against number of airlines and IATA (International Aviation Transport Association) as defendants--Action based on alleged conspiracy in breach of Competition Act, civil claim based on Act, s. 36--Order made under Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA), ss. 11.3, 11.4 not having effect of automatically staying proceedings in Court--Order by Farley J. on April 1, 2003, subsequently extended, not having such effect--Parliament not intending orders made by superior courts of provinces in exercise of CCAA jurisdiction should extend so as to oblige Court to suspend proceedings in any matter properly belonging to its jurisdiction--In Canada, superior courts not competing with one another--Farley J.'s order requesting Court, in comity, in recognition of fact both courts engaged in single legal system in administration of Canadian justice, should lend aid to order of Ontario Superior Court of Justice staying proceedings--Not ordinary stay-- Stay granted in comity need not meet requirements of classic three-part test, and not needing evidence--Court will give such aid on proper application being made--Burden on person seeking to avoid consequences of Court acting in aid of provincial superior court exercising jurisdiction under CCAA to show Court it should not act in aid--Judge not right person to decide proceedings should go forward notwithstanding CCAA proceedings, to decide whether Farley J. made mistake--Only Farley J. can decide third basis for stay order to allow company to concentrate efforts on reorganization, not to be distracted by defence of other claims--Stay extended for further period of three months unless Farley J. should, in interim, lift underlying stays in Ontario Superior Court of Justice, and therefore reasons for stay--Competition Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. C-34, s. 36 (as am. by R.S.C., 1985 (4th Supp.), c. 1, s. 11)--Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. C-36, ss. 11.3 (as enacted by S.C. 1997, c. 12, s. 124), 11.4 (as enacted idem; S.C. 2000, c. 30, s. 156; 2001, c. 34, s. 33).