ALBERTA RULES OF COURT PROJECT Enforcement of Judgments ...

modernize these essential rules. We would eliminate the writ of possession on the
ground that a well-drafted judgment or order will do the same job. The problem of
goods left in a property subject of a possession order is now dealt with by the
cumbersome Rule 363. We propose that the rule be amended to bring it into line with
the more flexible scheme set out in the Residential Tenancies Act.
9. Rules 494.1-498 governing sale of land should be retained with minor
amendments.
10. The new Alberta rules should provide a range of penalties which a court may
give against someone who acts contrary to or who disobeys a court order other
than an order for the payment of money – One of the most common complaints of
respondents to the Rules Project is that the courts will not enforce their own orders,
often because they will not imprison the violator for contempt. In our view, the
solution is the creation of a rule listing a variety of possible penalties for disobedience
to an order. The list would include but would not be limited to contempt; it would
include penalties ranging from a warning to a fine to a monetary award. Other
remedies may include modification or elimination of exemptions from enforcement,
suspension of the driver’s licence of the delinquent under the motor vehicle legislation
and remedies aimed at directors and officers of corporate offenders. The substance of
the present Rules 364 to 367 should be amended and included in the list. Another
possible remedy is to follow the example of the present Rule 367 and section 8 of the
Civil Enforcement Act. These provisions empower the court to get someone else to
perform the act which the disobedient person should have performed. The choice of
the appropriate penalty or remedy will lie with the court. While contempt may well be
appropriate in serious cases, the capacity to choose a less severe penalty may result in
the rules being enforced more often and more firmly than is now the case.
11. The Winding-up and Restructuring Act Rules [WURA Rules] (Rules 754-812)
should be repealed – The Winding-up Act was passed in 1882 to deal with the
liquidation of “Insolvent Banks, Insurance Companies, Loan Companies, Building
Societies, and Trading Corporations.” The Act, now re-entitled the Winding-up and
Restructuring Act [WURA], is still in force and continues to be the basis for a
relatively small but significant type of liquidation. Some western provinces, including
xviii