Paradis Honey Ltd v Alberta
Paradis Honey Ltd
Law Firm / Organization
KMSC Law LLP
Lawyer(s)

Shawn Sipma

His Majesty the King in Right of Alberta
Law Firm / Organization
Not Specified
Agricultural Financial Services Corporation
Law Firm / Organization
SB LLP
ABC Corporation operating as AgriStability
Law Firm / Organization
Not Specified
XYZ Corporation operating as Agricultural Financial Services Corporation
Law Firm / Organization
Not Specified

Key Facts:

  • Paradis Honey Ltd, a seventh-generation apiary near Girouxville, Alberta, takes hives to BC for pollination contracts every spring.
  • AFSC offers linked AgriStability and AgriInsurance plans, requiring bees to be back in Alberta by May 31 for coverage.
  • This new deadline, changed in 2016 without consultation, was reverted to June 20 in 2021 due to producer opposition.
  • Paradis could not meet the May 31 deadline, affecting their best practices and BC contracts.
  • Consequently, Paradis did not obtain AgriInsurance for 2018 and 2020, suffering financial losses of $94,305 and $99,188 respectively.
  • AgriStability benefits were reduced by 70% plus insurance premiums due to non-compliance.

Legal Issues:

  • Paradis Honey Ltd sought relief from forfeiture due to inability to comply with the changed deadline.
  • Relief from forfeiture is considered under section 10 of the Judicature Act and section 520 of the Insurance Act.
  • The Court examined whether the deemed benefits clause could be considered unconscionable or if the non-compliance was inadvertent or deliberate.

Court's Analysis:

  • The Court found that the clause in question was clear and not ambiguous.
  • Relief from forfeiture requires consideration of the applicant's conduct, the breach's gravity, and the disparity between forfeited property value and damage caused by the breach.
  • The non-compliance by Paradis was deliberate and not due to imperfect compliance.
  • The jurisdiction to grant relief from forfeiture is limited to contractual penalties and forfeitures, not statutory ones.
  • The Court concluded that AFSC's decision, whether ill-advised or not, does not qualify for relief under the given legal principles.

Disposition:

  • The application by AFSC to dismiss Paradis Honey Ltd’s claim was allowed.
  • The case was dismissed.

 

Court of King's Bench of Alberta
2003 22676
Insurance law
Defendant