This was an Application by the Applicant, Shahin Layeghpour, to appeal a Decision that dismissed his request to set aside a Default Judgment obtained by the Respondent, Leila Rashidi. The Respondent had secured a Default Judgment against the Applicant for unpaid monies invested in a technology project. Despite challenges in serving the Applicant, the Respondent successfully utilized an Order for substitutional service, resulting in a Default Judgment of $8,000. She then commenced collection proceedings.

Upon learning of the Judgment, the Applicant sought to have the Default Judgment set aside. This Application was denied by the Alberta Court of Justice, leading the Applicant to appeal to the Alberta Court of King's Bench.

In his Appeal, the Applicant raised issues concerning improper service, the jurisdiction of Alberta Courts, and the qualifications for reopening a Noting in Default. The Court determined that service was properly executed under Rule 11.25, as the Applicant was residing in Alberta at the time. The Court also confirmed Alberta's jurisdiction over the dispute, referring to the Applicant's residency and the governing law clause in the agreement.

Per Rule 9.15, reopening a Noting in Default requires a reasonable explanation for failing to defend, no unreasonable delay in applying to reopen the Noting in Default, and an arguable defence. The Court held that the Applicant did not present a sufficient defence on the merits. As a result, the Appeal was dismissed.