2008 BCSC 590 CIBC v. Marples

Before: The Honourable Madam Justice Martinson

Reasons for Judgment

Counsel for the Plaintiff	G. H. Richards
Simon Kimble Marples	In Person
Date and Place of Trial/Hearing:	29 April 2008
	New Westminster, B.C.

[1] This is a claim by the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce for judgment against the defendant, Simon Kimble Marples, for $10,673.39, being the amount it says he owes on two CIBC Classic Visa accounts.

[2] Mr. Marples has taken a “debt protest” approach of the sort described by this Court in a number of cases including Dempsey et al. v. Envision Credit Union et al. In that case, not only was that class proceeding application dismissed (2006 BCSC 750), but the Court awarded special costs (2006 BCSC 1324).

[3] Mr. Marples statement of defence and counterclaim says this:

STATEMENT OF DEFENCE

AND

COUNTERCLAIM

1. This Statement of Defence and Counterclaim is filed on behalf of the Nominal Defendant, Simon Kimble Marples also known as Simon Kimball Marples also known as Simon K. Marples also known as Simon Marples by Third Party Intervener, Real Party in Interest and Authorized Representative, Simon Kimble Marples.

2. Simon Kimble Marples also known as Simon Kimball Marples also known as Simon K. Marples also known as Simon Marples conditionally accepts the Plaintiff's presentments / claims for value in exchange for settlement and closure of this accounting, certified and sworn on the commercial liability of the Plaintiff's authorized representative and its solicitors as true, correct, and complete, with all related endorsements front and back.

3. Simon Kimble Marples also known as Simon Kimball Marples also known as Simon K. Marples also known as Simon Marples conditionally accepts for value and returns for value all of the charging instruments in this matter and make his exemption available for discharge of all obligations and charges connected to this case.

4. The Defendant's conditional acceptance for value for settlement and closure is subject to:

a). the Plaintiff providing validated or verifiable evidence that the herein account was opened in the name of Simon Kimble Marples the man and not SIMON KIMBLE MARPLES or any derivatives thereof; also known as Simon Kimball Marples also known as Simon K. Marples also known as Simon Marples

b). the Plaintiff providing all original or certified true copies of contracts, records, promissory notes (front and back) and other instruments and audited statements which substantiate the validity of every ledger entry including proof of loss;

c). the Plaintiff providing record of accountability of the party who made the the [sic] entries on the records or ledger;

d). the Plaintiff attesting the accuracy, relevance and verifiability of every record with supporting sworn statement signed by a human being who takes full commercial liability and responsibility for the validity and truthfulness of all information contained in the Plaintiff's records and presentments.

6. Failure to prove 5a, 5b, 5c and 5d above, the Defendant instructs the court the Plaintiffs claims be dismissed and demands that special costs be awarded to the Nominal Defendant.

COUNTERCLAIM

7. In the event that the Plaintiff and its solicitors are not able to produce the materials required per paragraphs 5a, 5b, 5c and 5d above, the Nominal Defendant revokes acceptance for value and counterclaims as follows:

8. Breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, fraud and fraudulent misrepresentation against the Plaintiff;

9. Conspiracy to commit fraud and unjust enrichment against the Plaintiff and its solicitors;

10. Malicious institution of civil proceeding against the Plaintiff and its solicitors;

11. Abuse of process against the Plaintiff and its solicitors;

12. Unlawful interference with the Nominal Defendant's private contract against the Plaintiff's solicitors.

13. Compensatory damages against the Plaintiff and its solicitors;

14. Punitive damages against the Plaintiff and its solicitors;

15. Special costs against the Plaintiff and its solicitors;

16. Such further and other relief this court deems meet and just.

[4] After filing the statement of defence and counterclaim he proceeded to make completely inappropriate requests of CIBC in support of his allegations. He sent voluminous, irrelevant material to the bank and its counsel, over a lengthy period of time.

[5] CIBC has proven its claim against Mr. Marples and is entitled to judgment in the amount of $10,673.39.

[6] Mr. Marples withdrew his counterclaim, but only during the course of his arguments at the hearing. To that point, CIBC was required to defend the allegations.

[7] Mr. Marples chose to advance his defence and counterclaim in spite of the fact that this Court has clearly stated that such an approach is completely devoid of merit and will lead to special costs. Such conduct is reprehensible as defined by the Court of Appeal in Garcia v. Crestbrook Forest Industries Ltd., (1994), 9 B.C.L.R. (3d) 242. CIBC is therefore entitled to special costs, payable forthwith.

"Martinson J."

Citation:	*CIBC v. Marples,*
	2008 BCSC 590