M. Singh Law Professional Corporation (Appellant) appealed a decision dismissing its motion for a charging order under section 34 of the Solicitors Act, which would entitle it to a lien on property recovered or preserved for its client, River Green (Thunder Bay) Inc. (Respondent).
Key Points:
The Appellant was hired to defend the Respondent against a default judgment obtained by its landlord, successfully setting aside the judgment and defending against the landlord’s claim.
The Appellant’s efforts included obtaining an order dismissing the landlord’s claim and noting the landlord in default on the counterclaim but failed to secure a default judgment that included restoration of property control to the Respondent.
The Solicitors Act requires demonstration that property was "recovered or preserved" through the solicitor’s efforts to grant a charging order.
The motion judge ruled that the property was already preserved by another order 18 months earlier, which the Appellant was not involved in, and found the Appellant's actions did not meet the criteria for a charging order.
Outcome:
The Court of Appeal upheld the motion judge’s decision, agreeing that the Appellant did not recover or preserve any property through its legal actions and thus was not entitled to a charging order.
The appeal was dismissed, affirming the discretionary nature of the order and the correctness of the motion judge's refusal to grant it. No specific amount of costs or awards ordered
