ARTICLE
28 March 2025

Understanding Preservation Orders: Key Takeaways From A Recent Saskatchewan Case

ML
McKercher LLP

Contributor

McKercher LLP is a full-service law firm with offices in Saskatchewan, Canada with roots tracing back to 1926. With over 70 lawyers and locations in both Saskatoon and Regina, we have played an integral role in Saskatchewan’s most significant commercial projects and have led litigation cases that have shaped Canadian law.
In February 2025, the Saskatchewan King's Bench issued an important decision in Loucks v Regina Humane Society Inc. The case involved twenty-one dogs seized by the Regina Humane Society.
Canada Saskatchewan Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration

What Happened

In February 2025, the Saskatchewan King's Bench issued an important decision in Loucks v Regina Humane Society Inc. The case involved twenty-one dogs seized by the Regina Humane Society. Their owner sought a legal remedy called a "preservation order" to prevent the Humane Society from disposing of or otherwise dealing with the dogs while the dispute was ongoing.

Why It Matters

The Court's decision provides valuable guidance on when and how you can (and can't) protect property during legal disputes. Understanding these rules can help you make informed decisions if you ever need to safeguard assets or prevent another party from disposing of property central to a legal claim.

Key Points to Understand

When Preservation Orders Are Appropriate

The Court clarified that preservation orders under Saskatchewan's Enforcement of Money Judgments Act (EMJA):

- Can only be used to preserve the defendant's property (e.g., where there's a risk a defendant might dispose of their assets, preventing the plaintiff from enforcing a judgment against them) – not to preserve the plaintiff's property

  • Are specifically designed for debt collection type claims
  • Must be specifically requested in the plaintiff's statement of claim

The Court's Decision

In this case, the Court dismissed the application for a preservation order because it was not appropriate in the circumstances. The plaintiff owner was trying to prevent the Humane Society from dealing with what they claimed was their property (the dogs), not the Humane Society's property.

Alternative Options

Importantly, the Court emphasized that other legal remedies remain available when a preservation order isn't appropriate. These include common law injunctions and remedies under The King's Bench Rules and The King's Bench Act.

How This Could Affect You

If you ever need to:

  • Protect your property during a dispute
  • Prevent another party from disposing of their assets

It's essential to choose the right legal tool for your specific situation. Using the wrong mechanism, as happened in this case, can result in a dismissal of your application and delays in protecting your interests.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More