114509 Canada Inc. v. 2756-3105 Québec Inc.
ITA-10586-95
Morneau P.
10/1/97
11 pp.
Jurisdiction of prothonotary-Question whether Federal Court prothonotary has jurisdiction to hear motion to oppose seizure in execution of movable property made pursuant to Quebec Code of Civil Procedure, art. 597-In November 1995, judgment creditor stating by certificate judgment debtor indebted to it-Certificate registered in Federal Court, equivalent to judgment in amount stated in certificate-Creditor could therefore begin compulsory execution measures giving effect to said judgment-Opposition to seizure in execution of movable property on ground objector, sole owner of property attached-Counsel for creditor and counsel for objector indicating intended to challenge prothonotary's jurisdiction to hear motion to oppose-R. 336(1)(g) providing prothonotary has power to dispose of any interlocutory application-According to case law, prothonotary has jurisdiction to hear motion to strike action pursuant to R. 419(1)(a)-Interlocutory motion incidental to judgment, whether made before or after judgment rendered and regardless of possible impact of order to be made on rights of parties-Approach taken, wording adopted by legislature in reform of Civil Code of Quebec making clear incidental nature of motion to oppose in connection with execution of judgment-Quebec legislature intended to remove formality, former originating function from opposition procedure and make opposition simply incidental motion-Code of Civil Procedure providing certain remedies begun by originating motion, but this institution does not apply to motion to oppose-Motion to oppose incidental to execution of judgment, thus interlocutory motion Federal Court prothonotary has jurisdiction to dispose of pursuant to R. 336(1)(g)-Preliminary objection by creditor and objector dismissed-Federal Court Rules, C.R.C., c. 663, RR. 336(1)(g), 419(1)(a)-Code of Civil Procedure, R.S.Q., c. C-25, art. 597-Civil Code of Québec.