Caribbean Ispat Ltd. v. Companhia de Navegacao Lloyd Brasilairo
T-631-92
Teitelbaum J.
22/12/92
8 pp.
Application to stay action as against defendant Companhia de Navegacao Lloyd Brasilairo and ship Rio Acre on ground Japan would be most convenient Court to have jurisdiction in matter -- Federal Court Act, s. 50 giving Court discretion to stay proceedings in any cause or matter on ground claim being proceeded with in another court or jurisdiction or where for any other reason in interest of justice proceedings be stayed -- Action for negligence resulting in damage to goods -- Canada's only connection with carriage of goods that affidavit to lead warrant filed and warrant to arrest vessel obtained in Vancouver -- Parties unable to agree on jurisdiction -- Application dismissed -- Reference to test to determine if stay should be granted set out in Yasuda Fire & Marine Insurance Co. Ltd. v. The Ship Nosira Lin, [1984] 1 F.C. 895 (C.A.) -- Whether another forum in which justice can be done between parties at substantially less inconvenience or expense and stay will not deprive plaintiffs of legitimate personal or juridical advantage -- Requires consideration of all circumstances, in particular those stated in Burrard-Yarrows Corp. v. The Hoegh Merchant, [1982] 1 F.C. 248 (T.D.) -- Judicial discretion to grant stay ought not to be exercised except under special circumstances and onus on party seeking stay to show such special circumstances exist: Reading & Bates Construction Co. et al. v. Gaz Inter-Cite Quebec Inc. (1984), 2 C.P.R. (3d) 266 (F.C.T.D.) -- As one plaintiff from Trinidad and Tobago, defendant from Brazil, vessel loaded in Trinidad, as convenient for parties to come to Canada as to go to Japan -- Although other two plaintiffs from Japan, both requesting case be heard in Canada -- None of defendants having any relationship to Japan -- Perhaps hoping to raise defence Japanese court lacking jurisdiction -- Plaintiffs would suffer prejudice because would take twice as long to bring present case to conclusion in Japan as in Canada; no compulsory discovery of documents in Japan; no examination for discovery; could not recover plaintiffs' lawyers fee as costs -- Canada most convenient forum -- Federal Court Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. F-7, s. 50.