UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 8-K

CURRENT REPORT

Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

~~June~~July 9 3, 2006

(Date of earliest event reported)

HOUSE OF BRUSSELS CHOCOLATES INC.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

NEVADA	000-29213	52-2202416
(State or other	(Commission File	(IRS Employer
(State or other Jurisdiction of incorporation	(Commission File Number)	(IRS Employer Identification No.)
Jurisdiction of incorporation	Number)	Identification No.)

1658 FOSTERS WAY, DELTA, BC, ~~CANDA~~CANADA, V3M 6S6

(Address of principal executive offices)

(604) 636-1056

Registrant's telephone number, including area code

ITEM 2.04

TRIGGERING EVENTS THAT ACCELERATE OR INCREASE A DIRECT FINANCIAL OBLIGATION OR AN OBLIGATION UNDER AN OFF-BALANCE SHEET ARRANGEMENT

On July 1, 2006, House of Brussels Chocolates Inc. (the “Company”) failed to pay $151,000 in principal and interest due on its indebtedness with Laurus Master Funds (“Laurus”). Under the terms of the indebtedness, this failure to pay creates an event of default beginning the sixth day after such payment was due. In addition, in accordance with our agreements with Laurus; a) any breach of covenant remaining uncured for fifteen (15) days, or; b) judgment rendered against us in excess of $100,000 which is not vacated, discharged, stayed or bonded within thirty (30) days from the entry thereof, shall also constitute an event of default. On June 9, 2006, we were notified that findings of fact were issued in the case of Stephen Whittington, et al. v. House of Brussels Chocolates, Inc., et al., that found the Company was liable on a breach of contract claim in the amount of $2,702,000. On July 3, 2006, we filed a notice of appeal in this matter. We have also failed to pay certain Canadian taxes when due, and are in non-compliance with the Formula Amount governing our Secured Revolving Note with Laurus.

As of the date of this filing, no notice of acceleration relating to our indebtedness with Laurus has been received. We are actively working with Laurus to avoid acceleration. In the event we are unsuccessful, however, the balance due on the indebtedness of $4,975,000 could become immediately due and payable.

ITEM 8.01

OTHER INFORMATION

OnIn ~~June 9, 2006, we were notified that~~ the ~~Eighth District Court of Clark County,~~ ~~Nevada issued~~matter ~~findings~~ of ~~fact and conclusions of law on June 5, 2006, in the case of~~ Stephen Whittington, et al. v. House of Brussels Chocolates, Inc., et al., ~~The judge found in favor of Stephen Whittington (“Whittington”) and~~the ~~against~~Company ~~House~~has ofbeen ~~Brussels~~unsuccessful ~~Chocolates~~in ~~Inc.~~negotiating ~~(the~~a ~~“Company”)~~settlement. onAs a ~~breach~~result, ofwe ~~contract~~have filed ~~claim~~a innotice ~~the amount~~ of ~~$2,701,918. The~~appeal ~~judge~~with ~~also~~the ~~found~~Eighth ~~that Grant~~Judicial ~~Petersen,~~District ~~our~~Court ~~current~~of ~~President, CEO and Director (“Petersen”), and Evan~~Clark ~~Baergen~~County, ~~our former president and director (“Baergen”)~~Nevada, ~~are~~appealing ~~jointly and severally liable with~~ the ~~Company~~verdict ~~for~~to the ~~$2,701,918~~Nevada ~~amount~~Supreme ~~based on an alter ego theory~~Court. ~~The~~ ~~judge's~~In ~~ruling states that Whittington is also entitled to~~connection ~~prejudgment~~with ~~interest. In~~this ~~reaching his findings and conclusions~~appeal, ~~the~~we ~~judge rejected~~will ~~Whittington's~~continue ~~claim~~settlement ~~that~~discussions ~~Petersen~~ and ~~Baergen acted fraudulently~~vigorously ~~and~~pursue ~~also~~relief ~~rejected~~from ~~Matthew~~the ~~Kaplan's~~judgment ~~claims~~in ~~for~~the ~~recovery~~Nevada Supreme Court.

WeIn ~~are presently~~connection ~~engaged~~with inthese ~~settlement~~events, ~~negotiations~~we ~~with~~are ~~Whittington.~~currently Noinvestigating ~~assurances,~~strategic ~~however,~~alternatives ~~can~~which bemay ~~given~~include ~~that~~the asale ~~settlement~~of ~~will~~certain ~~be reached~~assets. In the event ~~that~~such wea ~~are~~sale ~~unsuccessful~~is ~~in our negotiations~~undertaken, we ~~intend~~may toincur ~~appeal~~a write down in the ~~court’s~~value of goodwill related ~~ruling~~to our domestic subsidiary located in Fresno, California.

SIGNATURE

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned hereunto duly authorized.

	HOUSE OF BRUSSELS CHOCOLATES INC.
Date: June 12, 2006
Date: July 6, 2006
	By: /s/ Grant Petersen
	Grant Petersen
	Chief Executive Officer and President

Filing Compare · HOUSE OF BRUSSELS CHOCOLATES INC