Chiang (Re)

CITATION: Chiang (Re), 2009 ONCA 153

DATE: 20090218

DOCKET: C47106

COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO

Laskin, Simmons and Armstrong JJ.A.

In the Matter of the Bankruptcy of Jay Tien Chiang of the Town of Richmond Hill, in the Regional Municipality of York in the Province of Ontario

BETWEEN

Mendlowitz & Associates Inc. in its capacity as trustee in bankruptcy of Jay Tien Chiang, Korea Data Systems, Co. Ltd., also known as K.D.S. Korea, and Korea Data Systems (USA), Inc.

Applicants (Respondents)

and

Jay Tien Chiang, Christina Chiang, also known as Suh Mei Tasi, Chun Chun Wu, Jie Chu Wu, Chen Cheng Yueh Tsai Yu Chang Chiang, also known as Y.C. Chiang, En Fu Chiang, Brenda Chang, Samson Chang, David Cheng, Everview Inc., 961266 Ontario Inc., 1204360 Ontario Inc., 1243723 Ontario Inc., Aamazing Technologies Inc., Wen Wang Chiang also known as Wen Chiang also known as Wen Wang, Crystalview Technology Corp., E.C. Holdings Ltd., Telepower International (Canada) Inc. and Best Buy Electronics Inc., Su Feng Tsai also known as Tsai Su Feng Tsai Zheng Li, Tsai Zheng Ying, Asia Pacific Gateway (H.K) Ltd., Century Group Holdings Ltd., and Albany Investments Ltd.

Defendants (Appellants)

AND BETWEEN

Mendlowitz & Associates Inc. in its capacity as trustee in bankruptcy of Jay Tien Chiang, Korea Data Systems, Co. Ltd., also known as K.D.S. Korea and Korea Data Systems (USA), Inc.

Applicants (Respondents)

and

Jay Tien Chiang, also known as Jay Chiang, also known as Tienchien Chiang, and Ontario Parole and Earned Release Board

Defendants (Appellants)

Counsel:

J. Thomas Curry and Marguerite Ethier, for the appellants

Christopher D. Bredt and Aaron A. Blumenfeld, for the respondents

Malliha Wilson and Christopher Thompson, for the intervener, the Attorney General of Ontario

Heard: February 11 and 12, 2008

On appeal from the orders of Justice Joan L. Lax of the Superior Court of Justice dated April 17, 2007 and reported at 2007 ONSC 12203 (Ont. S.C.), May 14, 2007 and reported at (2007), 2007 ONSC 82789 (ON SC), 85 O.R. (3d) 425 (Ont. S.C.), April 30, 2007 and September 26, 2007.

ENDORSEMENT

1The parties have asked that we resolve three issues arising from our reasons. These are the three issues:

1. Should our order direct that the matter be remitted to Lax J.?

2. Should Christina Chiang be given credit for having served one day in custody so that her remaining sentence to be served is six days instead of seven days?

3. Is KDS entitled to maintain possession of the passport of Jay Chiang and, once her sentence is served, the passport of Christina Chiang?

2The parties are divided on each of these issues. We resolve them as follows.

3In her sentencing decision, Lax J. ordered that once Mr. Chiang had served his sentence, both Mr. and Mrs. Chiang should be brought before her. We did not disturb that part of her order. In the light of our reasons, Mr. Chiang has now served his sentence. Accordingly, both he and his wife should be brought before the trial judge.

4Since Mr. and Mrs. Chiang are to be brought before the trial judge, we think it appropriate that she determine whether Christina Chiang should be given credit for having served one day of her sentence, and whether KDS is entitled to maintain possession of the passports of Mr. and Mrs. Chiang.

5Finally, we do not consider that Lax J. is seized of any further proceedings in this matter. Nor do we consider that she is precluded from hearing any further proceedings. If further proceedings are taken, their scheduling is a matter for the Superior Court.