Court File and Parties
COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO
Feldman, Juriansz and LaForme JJ.A.
BETWEEN:
More & More AG
Applicant (Respondent in Appeal)
And
P.Y.A. Importer Ltd.
Respondent (Appellant)
Counsel: Antonin I. Pribetic, for the appellant Doug Bourassa, for the respondent
Heard and endorsed: November 9, 2010 On appeal from the judgment of Justice Michael G. Quigley of the Superior Court of Justice dated April 20, 2010.
APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT
1The appellant’s position on this appeal is that the service on his client by serving the receptionist was not in accordance with the Hague Convention. However, this is a factual issue which turns on whether the receptionist was in control of the business at the time. There was no evidence before the motion judge that she was not. Counsel for the respondent also submits that had the factual issue been raised properly, he would have sought to also put evidence before the court. In our view, on the record before the motion judge, he made no error in his view that service was proper and there is no basis for this court to interfere.
2The appeal is therefore dismissed with costs fixed at $5,900 inclusive of disbursements and applicable taxes.