STACEY v FOY, 2014 ABCA 394
3.37: Application for judgment against defendant noted in default
3.68: Court options to deal with significant deficiencies
11.20: Service of documents, other than commencement documents, in Alberta
11.21: Service by electronic method
The Applicant and the Respondent were in a personal relationship. After the relationship ended, the Applicant was charged with assault, and subsequently brought an Action for malicious prosecution. The Respondent counterclaimed on various grounds including partner support and defamation.
In a procedural Application, the Court directed that the Applicant could be served by email. The Applicant was subsequently notified by email of a case management hearing four days before it was held. The Applicant acknowledged receiving the email, but argued that he did not see the email until the afternoon before the day of the hearing. The Applicant failed to attend the meeting.
With reference to Rules 11.20 and 11.21(1), the Court stated that the electronic service was adequate. The Court concluded that the Applicant had adequate notice of the case management hearing, and there was no evidence of prejudice to the Applicant. The Respondent subsequently successfully applied, pursuant to Rule 3.68(4)(b), to strike the Applicant’s Statement of Claim and Defence to the Counterclaim. The Applicant was thus deemed to have admitted to the allegations in the Respondent’s Counterclaim. Pursuant to Rule 3.37(1), the Trial Judge granted a Judgment in favour of the Respondent. The Court of Appeal did not find any error in the prior proceedings. The Appeal was dismissed with Costs awarded to the Respondent.View CanLII Details