has failed to pay money to the clerk in accordance with this Part, the Court may grant judgment against the garnishee for the amount of the garnishee summons or a lesser amount as the Court considers appropriate in the circumstances. If any doubts that it is “employment earnings” should also check the “money owing from other sources” box Wayfarer Holidays Ltd. V Barcelo Ratio Courts have an equitable discretion to stay garnishee proceedings if there is risk of double payment Facts Both Sunquest and Canadian have been advised by representatives of the Bavaro Beach Hotel, if the funds are paid pursuant to the notice of garnishment and are not forwarded to ITASA, the hotel will not honour reservations of Sunquest and Canadian travellers upon their arrival in the Dominican Republic. Canadian deposed it cannot pay the disputed moneys into court or to the sheriff and at the same time protect the interests of its clients Sunquest also deposed it must make the required payments to protect its vacationers Issues Does the court have a discretion to stay garnishee proceedings on equitable grounds? On what basis might the court exercise the discretion? Decision No order for garnishment shall issue because of the real and substantial risk of double payment by the garnishees Reasoning A garnishee ought not to be placed in double jeopardy so that the garnishee is at risk of having to pay the same debt twice The risk of double payment must be a real risk and not a speculative or theoretical hazard On the material before me, the risk of double payment is real and substantial. Notes Double jeopardy for two reasons – one, would pay twice so clients could stay in the hotel, two, would potentially be subject to litigation in Dominican Republic In AB – s. 5 Re Sunstar Mfg Inc
has failed to pay money to the clerk in accordance with this Part, the Court may grant judgment against the garnishee for the amount of the garnishee summons or a lesser amount as the Court considers appropriate in the circumstances. If any doubts that it is “employment earnings” should also check the “money owing from other sources” box Wayfarer Holidays Ltd. V Barcelo Ratio Courts have an equitable discretion to stay garnishee proceedings if there is risk of double payment Facts Both Sunquest and Canadian have been advised by representatives of the Bavaro Beach Hotel, if the funds are paid pursuant to the notice of garnishment and are not forwarded to ITASA, the hotel will not honour reservations of Sunquest and Canadian travellers upon their arrival in the Dominican Republic. Canadian deposed it cannot pay the disputed moneys into court or to the sheriff and at the same time protect the interests of its clients Sunquest also deposed it must make the required payments to protect its vacationers Issues Does the court have a discretion to stay garnishee proceedings on equitable grounds? On what basis might the court exercise the discretion? Decision No order for garnishment shall issue because of the real and substantial risk of double payment by the garnishees Reasoning A garnishee ought not to be placed in double jeopardy so that the garnishee is at risk of having to pay the same debt twice The risk of double payment must be a real risk and not a speculative or theoretical hazard On the material before me, the risk of double payment is real and substantial. Notes Double jeopardy for two reasons – one, would pay twice so clients could stay in the hotel, two, would potentially be subject to litigation in Dominican Republic In AB – s. 5 Re Sunstar Mfg Inc
60+-+Law+514+JEL+CAN.docx