Columbia Pictures Industries Inc. v. Caron

Columbia Pictures Industries Inc. v. Caron
Court (s) Database
Federal Court Decisions
Date
2001-11-27
Neutral citation
2001 FCT 1296
File numbers
T-79-01
Notes
Digest
Decision Content
Date: 20011127
Docket: T-79-01
Neutral Citation: 2001 FCT 1296
BETWEEN:
COLUMBIA PICTURES INDUSTRIES, INC.
DISNEY ENTERPRISES INC.,
METRO-GOLDWYN-MAYER STUDIOS INC.,
PARAMOUNT PICTURES CORPORATION,
TRISTAR PICTURES, INC.,
TWENTIETH CENTURY FOX FILM CORPORATION,
UNITED ARTISTS CORPORATION,
UNITED ARTISTS PICTURES INC.,
UNIVERSAL CITY STUDIOS, INC.,
WARNER BROS., a division of
TIME WARNER ENTERTAINMENT CO., L.P.
Applicants
and
STÉPHANE CARON, doing business under the name
of "MARCHÉAUX PUCES CHEZ DAN"
and MARIO CARON
Respondents
REASONS FOR ORDER
BLAIS J.
[1] This is a motion for an order that security for costs be given.
[2] The respondents base their motion particularly on the fact that the applicants are all multinationals incorporated in the U.S. and that their head offices are not located in Canada. The respondents contend that they are entitled to assume that the applicants have no assets in Canada, and that they should be required to deposit security to guarantee that costs, if awarded, may be recovered.
[3] At the hearing, counsel for the respondent established that the costs that are foreseeable at present amount to $2,640 and not $22,000, as was initially stated in the motion, and she also asked to be allowed to reserve her rights to make a further request for costs incurred subsequently.
[4] Counsel for the applicants clearly established at the hearing, and in fact the respondents admitted, that the respondents had pleaded guilty to criminal offences involving the same events as in this case: that they had sold descramblers to an individual who turned out to be an RCMP officer.
[5] Since the respondents have admitted their liability, the applicants quite reasonably wonder what argument the respondents can have for saying that the applicants might evade a court order in their favour.
[6] Rather, the respondents contend that it will be difficult for the applicants to establish that they did in fact sustain damages, and this could leave the door open for the claim to be dismissed on that point. The applicants replied that in cases where the infringing items had been seized in their entirety, the courts nonetheless awarded the applicants nominal damages in some cases.
[7] In light of the evidence in the record at present, I have no hesitation in concluding that the applicants' case is solid and that there is already an admission of criminal liability by the defendants in the record.
[8] The defendants failed to satisfy me that it was in the interest of justice that security for costs be authorized in the circumstances, having regard to the respondents' minimal chances of success in this case.
ORDER
[9] This motion for an order that security for costs be given is accordingly dismissed with costs payable by the respondents.
Pierre Blais
Judge
OTTAWA, ONTARIO
November 27, 2001
Certified true translation
Sophie Debbané, LL.B.
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
TRIAL DIVISION
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
COURT FILE NO.: T-79-01
STYLE OF CAUSE: COLUMBIA PICTURES INDUSTRIES INC. ET AL V. STÉPHANE CARON ET AL
PLACE OF HEARING: Québec, Quebec
DATE OF HEARING: November 16, 2001
REASONS AND ORDER OF THE HONOURABLE BLAIS J.
DATED: November 27, 2001
APPEARANCES:
Daniel Ovadia FOR THE APPLICANT
Stéphanie Lindsay FOR THE RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Ovadia Sauvageau FOR THE APPLICANT
Montréal, Quebec
Guy Bertrand & Associés FOR THE RESPONDENT
Québec, Quebec