Sonnenberg Inc. v Stewart, Smith

Max Sonnenberg Inc. v. Stewart, Smith (Canada) Ltd.
CourtAlberta Court of Queen’s Bench
Decided1986
Citations1986 CanLII 1771 (AB QB), [1987] 2 W.W.R. 75, 48 Alta. L.R. (2d) 367
Court membership
Judge sittingJoanne B. Veit
Keywords
Costs; solicitor–client costs; indemnity basis; litigation conduct; damages

Max Sonnenberg Inc. v. Stewart, Smith (Canada) Ltd., 1986 CanLII 1771 (AB QB), [1987] 2 W.W.R. 75, 48 Alta. L.R. (2d) 367, is a decision of the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench written by Justice Joanne B. Veit.[1][2]

Background

The case Max Sonnenberg Inc. v. Stewart, Smith has received judicial notice and is often cited in Canadian law for its discussion of solicitor–client and indemnity costs, and for distinguishing between damages—which address the wrongful act that gave rise to the cause of action—and costs, which relate to the parties’ conduct during the litigation itself.[3]

The dispute stemmed from a helicopter crash on May 12, 1981, at the Edmonton Municipal Airport. The aircraft, a Bell Jet Ranger leased from Max Sonnenberg, a Canadian aircraft lessor based in New Mexico, was operated by Shirley Air Services Ltd. Following the crash, the company’s president, Richard Rasmussen, reportedly tried to prevent journalists from photographing the scene.[4][5][6][7] The incident received media attention across Canada as well as in the United States.[8]

In the civil case that followed, Justice Joanne Veit of the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench found that Rasmussen had committed fraud by submitting a false proof-of-loss statement for the damaged helicopter without the owner’s consent. Sonnenberg was represented by Alec T. Murray, QC, who would later become a justice of the same court.[9]

The trial lasted eight weeks and involved ten lawyers as well as multiple aviation insurers. It ultimately produced a separate written ruling on costs, in which Justice Veit clarified the three traditional categories of cost awards and urged the adoption of consistent terminology for full-indemnity costs. Her reasoning was later endorsed by Judge L. Diane Young.[10]

As of 2025, the Sonnenberg decision has been cited more than sixty times in Canadian court judgments and legal commentaries.[11]

See also

References

  1. ^ Helm, Richard (May 1, 1986). "Air Charter Services President Committed Fraud, Judge Rules". Edmonton Journal.
  2. ^ Veit, Joanne B. (November 21, 1986). "Max Sonnenberg Inc. v. Stewart, Smith (Canada) Ltd., 1986 CanLII 1771 (AB KB)". [CanLII].
  3. ^ Steele, James (January 2018). "Deterrence Not Damages: The Punitive Rationale for Solicitor-Client Costs". Canadian Journal of Insurance Law. 36 (1): 11.
  4. ^ De Groot, Paul; Sadava, Mike (May 13, 1981). "Photographers' Film Seized". Edmonton Journal. p. B3.
  5. ^ De Groot, Paul; Sadava, Mike (May 13, 1981). "Photographers Manhandled At Crash Scene". Edmonton Journal. p. A3.
  6. ^ Struzik, Ed (May 14, 1981). "Police Searches Probed". Edmonton Journal. p. B3.
  7. ^ Hume, Mark (December 7, 1981). "Photographers' Dilemma Remains". Edmonton Journal. p. B3.
  8. ^ For the Canadian province of British Columbia, see "Crash Antics Claimed". The Vancouver Sun. May 13, 1981. p. A9.
  9. ^ "Alumnus remembered for career as litigator and Court of Queen's Bench justice". www.ualberta.ca. Retrieved 2025-10-11.
  10. ^ Young, L. Diane (February 28, 2018). "Northmont Resort Properties Ltd v Reid, 2018 ABPC 49" (PDF). [[CanLII].
  11. ^ Veit, Joanne B. (November 21, 1986). "Max Sonnenberg Inc. v. Stewart, Smith (Canada) Ltd., 1986 CanLII 1771 (AB KB)". [CanLII].

== External links ==

This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is available under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 unless otherwise noted. Additional terms may apply for the media files.