GOWLING WLG (CANADA) LLP v TSYBULNYK, 2020 ABQB 479
9.15: Setting aside, varying and discharging judgments and orders
10.20: Enforcement of review officer’s decision
In the course of a dispute between Gowling WLG (Canada) LLP (“Gowling”) and a former client regarding legal fees, Gowling obtained a Certificate of Review, Judgment, and Writ of Enforcement. The former client applied to have the Certificate of Review, Judgment, and Writ of Enforcement set aside.
The Applicant argued that Gowling’s Judgment was essentially a Default Judgment and that Rule 9.15 (pursuant to which the Court may set aside, vary or discharge a default judgment) was engaged. Gowling argued that Rule 10.20 (pursuant to which a decision of a Review Officer may be entered as a Default Judgment or Order) applied and that the test for setting aside a Default Judgment under Rule 9.15 did not apply. Under the version of Rule 10.20 which applied at the time Gowling sought an Order, there was no requirement to provide notice to the Applicant; however, under the current version of Rule 10.20, notice must be given to the other party before an Application may be brought to enter the decision of a Review Officer as a Judgment or Order.
Justice Jones noted that Gowling’s Application to enter the Certificate of Review as a Judgment did not refer to Rule 10.20, but did refer to other Rules in Part 10. His Lordship was satisfied that the Judgment was not a Default Judgment and dismissed the Application.View CanLII Details