FD: FD: DT:D DN: 613/90I2 STY:Barton v. Air Ontario Inc. PANEL: Moore; Jackson; Apsey DDATE: ACT: KEYW: Right to sue; In the course of
|
|
- Ruby Kennedy
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 FD: FD: DT:D DN: 613/90I2 STY:Barton v. Air Ontario Inc. PANEL: Moore; Jackson; Apsey DDATE: ACT: KEYW: Right to sue; In the course of employment (travelling); Jurisdiction, Tribunal (right to sue) (dependants). SUM: The plaintiffs in a civil action applied to determine whether their right of action was taken away. The plaintiffs were relatives of a worker who was killed in a plane crash. The worker was on his way to Winnipeg to attend a conference. He was expected to attend the conference. Attendance at another event the day before the conference was optional. The worker arranged to go to Winnipeg a day earlier in order to attend to some personal matters. The Panel found that the worker was in the course of employment, regardless of when the flight took place. He was exposed to the risk of travelling no matter which date he chose to travel. After receiving further submissions, the Panel will determine whether the plaintiffs are dependants of the worker. [10 pages] PDCON: TYPE: DIST: DECON: Decision No. 123 (1986), 2 W.C.A.T.R. 66 consd; Decision No. 490/88I (1988), 9 W.C.A.T.R. 332 refd to; Decisions No. 479/87I consd, 965/87 refd to, 847/88 refd to IDATE: HDATE: TCO: KEYPER: R. Poirier, a lawyer; C. McCall, a lawyer; W.D. Millar, a lawyer XREF: Decision No. 613/90I (1990), 19 W.C.A.T.R. 199 COMMENTS: TEXT:
2 WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 613/90I2 IN THE MATTER OF an application pursuant to section 17 of the Workers' Compensation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. W.11, as amended. AND IN THE MATTER OF an action commenced in the Supreme Court of Ontario at Thunder Bay as Action No. 1935/89. B E T W E E N: CHRISTOPHER BARTON and KEVIN BARTON, minors by their Litigation Guardian, DIANE BARTON and the said DIANE BARTON and RUDY BARTON SR. Applicants in this application and Plaintiffs in the Supreme Court of Ontario Action. - and - AIR ONTARIO INC. and CANADIAN AIRLINES INTERNATIONAL, CANADIAN PARTNER and ONTARIO EXPRESS LIMITED Respondents in this application and Defendants in the Supreme Court of Ontario Action.
3 WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 613/90I2 IN THE MATTER OF an application pursuant to section 17 of the Workers' Compensation Act. AND IN THE MATTER OF an action commenced in the Supreme Court of Ontario, at Thunder Bay, as Action No. 1935/89. B E T W E E N: CHRISTOPHER BARTON and KEVIN BARTON, minors by their Litigation Guardian, DIANE BARTON and the said DIANE BARTON and RUDY BARTON SR. Applicants/Plaintiffs - and - AIR ONTARIO INC. and CANADIAN AIRLINES INTERNATIONAL, CANADIAN PARTNER and ONTARIO EXPRESS LIMITED Respondents/Defendants WORKERS' COMPENSATION ACT SECTION 17 APPLICATION
4 WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 613/90I2 This application, which was originally brought pursuant to section 15 of the pre-1990 Act, was heard in Thunder Bay, on July 6, 1992, by a Tribunal Panel consisting of: J.P. Moore: Vice-Chair, R.H. Apsey: Member representative of employers, F. Jackson: Member representative of workers. A hearing of this application took place on August 21, 1990, and gave rise to Decision No. 613/90I, under a different panel. THE APPLICATION PROCEEDINGS This application under section 17 of the Workers' Compensation Act (section 15 of the pre-1990 Act) arises out of an airplane accident that occurred on March 10, That accident resulted in the death of Rudy Barton Jr. An action was commenced in the Supreme Court of Ontario by the Applicants, the family of Rudy Barton Jr., against the Respondents, on August 24, The Respondents are: Air Ontario Inc., Canadian Airlines International, Canadian Partner and Ontario Express limited. This application was brought by the Plaintiffs who seek a declaration pursuant to section 17 concerning their right to bring the legal action in question. The Applicants were represented by R. Poirier, a lawyer. The Respondent, Air Ontario, was represented by C. McCall, a lawyer. The other Respondents in the application were represented at the hearing by W.D. Millar, a lawyer. THE EVIDENCE Documentary evidence presented at the hearing of August 21, 1990, and described in Decision No. 613/90I as Exhibits #1 through #6, were before this Panel. In addition, the Panel had before it the following material: Exhibit #7: two "house letters" dated March 6, 1989; Exhibit #8: travel documents; Exhibit #9: an invoice dated March 3, 1989; Exhibit #10: a letter from the Plaintiffs' counsel, dated August 25, The Panel heard testimony under oath from W. Mowat, the regional sales manager for the deceased worker's employer, at the time of the events in
5 2 question. The Panel also heard testimony under oath from the deceased worker's widow. Submissions were made at the hearing by Mr. Poirier, Ms. McCall and Mr. Millar. THE NATURE OF THE CASE On March 10, 1989, Rudy Barton Jr. was travelling to Winnipeg, Manitoba on a flight operated by Air Ontario that originated in Thunder Bay, Ontario. The airplane on which Mr. Barton was a passenger crashed and Mr. Barton was fatally injured. As a result of this accident, a legal action has been commenced against Air Ontario and other defendants. The plaintiffs brought this application in order to clarify the status of the legal action commenced by them against Air Ontario. We note that the status of the action as against other defendants named in the action is not before us. In Decision No. 613/90I, the Panel ruled that, at the time of the accident in question, Air Ontario was a Schedule 1 employer. At the hearing giving rise to the present decision, the issue was whether the worker's claim against Air Ontario was barred by subsection 10(9) of the Act (formerly section 8(9)). Subsection 10(9) reads in part as follows: 10(9) No employer in Schedule 1 and no worker of an employer in Schedule 1 or dependant of such worker has a right of action for damages against any employer in Schedule 1 or any executive officer or any director or any worker of such employer, for an injury for which benefits are payable under this Act, where the workers of both employers were in the course of their employment at the time of the happening of the injury,... As we noted above, the Panel, in Decision No. 613/90I, ruled that Air Ontario was a Schedule 1 employer. The Plaintiffs' counsel did not dispute that the workers of Air Ontario were in the course of their employment when the accident happened. It was also not disputed by the plaintiffs that the employer of Rudy Barton Jr. was a Schedule 1 employer. The unresolved issue was whether Rudy Barton Jr. was in the course of his employment at the time of the happening of the accident that caused his death. THE PANEL'S REASONS (i) The facts The deceased worker, Rudy Barton Jr., was a branch manager for his employer. Mr. Barton lived in Marathon, Ontario. The employer arranged a conference for branch managers in Winnipeg. The conference was to take place on Sunday, March 12, Two in-house letters were sent to Mr. Barton on March 6, The first letter set out the agenda for the meeting, an agenda which suggested the meeting would last from
6 3 9:00 a.m. to approximately 5:00 p.m. The second letter described the accommodation arrangements made by the employer for Mr. Barton. The accommodation arrangements included accommodation on Friday and Saturday, March 10 and 11, That letter also indicated that Mr. Barton was to pay for his room and submit an expense claim for Saturday night only. The extra night's accommodation was arranged for Mr. Barton because Mr. Barton was to be a participant in a company-sponsored curling bonspiel. The bonspiel was taking place on Friday evening and Saturday and had been arranged by the employer's social committee. All expenses associated with the bonspiel were paid by the participants. The employer's involvement consisted of providing a trophy and making arrangements for accommodation. Mr. Mowat also testified that the branch managers' meeting was schedule to overlap with the bonspiel in order to enable some of the branch managers who otherwise could not have done so to participate in the bonspiel. Mr. Barton left for Winnipeg on Thursday, March 9, According to the testimony of Mrs. Barton, Mr. Barton wanted to get to Winnipeg early so that he could purchase hockey tickets for a team that he coached in his home town. Consequently, he took a flight from Marathon on the evening of March 9 to enable him to catch the early morning flight from Thunder Bay to Winnipeg on March 10. Mr. Barton was scheduled to take a 7:00 a.m. flight on March 10 on Canadian Partner Airline. However, the arranged flight was canceled and Mr. Barton arranged to fly from Thunder Bay to Winnipeg on an Air Ontario flight. Mr. Barton died as a result of the accident involving that flight. The evidence established that Mr. Barton's employer paid his air fare from Marathon to Winnipeg. Attendance at the Sunday meeting was "expected". Attendance at the bonspiel was optional. Mr. Barton was apparently paid for Friday, March 10. Mr. Mowat testified that it was common for branch managers, who were paid monthly, to take time off in lieu of extra time previously worked. Mr. Mowat testified that taking Friday, March 10 off in lieu of working on Sunday, March 12 would have been acceptable to the employer. Mrs. Barton conceded that Mr. Barton would not have gone to Winnipeg either for the bonspiel or to purchase the hockey tickets had the employer not paid his air fare to Winnipeg. (ii) Was Mr. Barton in the course of his employment at the time of the happening of the accident? In the Panel's opinion, Mr. Barton was in the course of his employment at the time of his fatal accident. Previous Tribunal decisions have indicated that the test in cases such as this is whether the worker was where he was at the time he was injured or killed because of his employment. That is, at the time of his injury, did the worker have the status of "worker". In the present case, the evidence establishes conclusively that Mr. Barton was travelling to Winnipeg because his employer expected him to attend a conference. Mr. Barton was on a flight to Winnipeg because of that conference. Although Mr. Barton had some choice concerning how and when he would travel, there was a clear expectation on the part of the employer that Mr. Barton was to be in Winnipeg by a certain date. Consequently, in our opinion, Mr. Barton was where he was at the time of his accident because of his employment. He was, therefore, in the course of his employment during his travel.
7 4 Mr. Poirier argued, on behalf of the applicant, that there was a substantial "deviation" by Mr. Barton that negated the employment aspect of the trip. In his view, the evidence established that Mr. Barton left early to purchase hockey tickets and to participate in an optional bonspiel sponsored by the employer. In his view, this temporal deviation was significant because it exposed Mr. Barton to greater risk. The greater risk arose out of the simple elongation of his trip. Mr. Poirier also argued that Mr. Barton's reasons for changing airlines, and selecting the fatal flight that he chose, were the result of his personal interests in getting to Winnipeg early to obtain hockey tickets. However, in the Panel's view, these arguments cannot stand in the face of the fact that the narrow issue before us is whether, during the time Mr. Barton was flying to Winnipeg, he was in the course of his employment. In the Panel's view, the answer to that question is yes, regardless of when that flight took place. Mr. Barton was compelled to travel to Winnipeg. Mr. Barton had the option of choosing how and when he got to Winnipeg. However, once he was embarked on whatever mode of transportation he took, as long as he proceeded in a straightforward way to his destination, he was in the course of his employment. The Panel was referred to two previous Tribunal decisions which have discussed this issue. In Decision No. 479/87I (May 29, 1987), the Panel stated, at pages 6 and 7: On these facts, we find that Mr. Walkey was engaged in a trip that had both a personal and a business reason... It was a dual purpose trip. With respect to such trips, Decision No. 420 of this Tribunal adopted the test applied by American courts which is stated as follows: Injury during a trip which serves both a business and a personal purpose is within the course of employment if the trip involved the performance of a service for the employer which would have caused the trip to be taken even if it had not coincided with the personal purpose. It was Mr. Bryant's submission that this particular trip would not have been taken at this particular time except for the personal aspect of the trip. In his submission, the worker was exposed to different risks because of the change in the timing of the trip than he would have been exposed to had the trip taken place the next day. In our view, this argument is addressed by the following passage from a decision by Judge Cardozo in the case of Marks' Dependents v. Gray, 25 1 N.Y. 90, 167 N.E. 181 (1920): The test in brief is this: if the work of the employee creates the necessity for travel, he is in the course of his employment, though he is serving at the same time some purpose of his own...if however the work has had no part in creating the necessity for travel, if the journey would have gone forward though
8 5 the business errand had been dropped, or would have been canceled upon the failure of the private purpose, though the business errand was undone, the travel was then personal, and personal to risk. In this case, had the personal reason for the trip been canceled, it would still have been necessary for the worker to make the return trip to his home in Burlington. In our view, the work of the employee created the necessity for travel, including the return trip, and in our view, this brings the worker within his course of his employment notwithstanding that there was also a personal aspect to the trip... Moreover, we agree with Mr. Fursman that it would be wrong to characterize a change in the timing of the trip on the facts of this case as creating a different risk. In our view, the risk to which Mr. Walkey was exposed is the risk of highway driving. That is the risk to which he would have been exposed on Friday afternoon or evening and is the very risk to which he was exposed on his trip when the accident occurred. In the Panel's view, the same analysis can be made in the present case: the risk to which Mr. Barton was exposed - travelling on an aircraft - was the same risk regardless of the date on which he chose to travel. We note also the following excerpt from Decision No. 123 (November 5, 1986). At page 4 of that decision the Panel stated: In these circumstances, we are of the view that, provided they were travelling to the conference in a straight forward manner which we have already concluded was the case, they should be considered to be in the course of their employment while en route to and from the conference. Nor are we persuaded that they took themselves out of the course of their employment because they initially planned to attend a social function. The social function was closely connected with the conference. While it wasn't necessary for them to attend the social function, there was evidence that the social function enhanced the value of the conference. Moreover, had the social function not been scheduled, there would still have been an obligation to get to the conference. The present case, in our view, falls squarely within the parameters described in the above two cases and buttresses our view that Mr. Barton was in the course of his employment at the time of his fatal injury on March 10, 1989.
9 6 (iii) Who is affected by this ruling? There are four plaintiffs in the court action giving rise to this application: the deceased worker's widow, his two children, and his father. Subsection 10(9) of the Act indicates that the right of action of a worker and his "dependants" can be barred by the subsection. On August 16, 1990, prior to the commencement of the hearings in this application, the parties were sent a letter from J. Sajtos of the Tribunal Counsel Office advising them of previous Tribunal decisions which had ruled that the Tribunal had jurisdiction under subsection 10(9) to take away the rights of action only of those parties to the action who were "dependants" as defined by the Act (see Decisions No. 490/88I, 847/88 and 965/87.) That definition reads as follows: "Dependants" means such of the members of the family of a worker as were wholly or partly dependant upon the worker's earnings at the time of his or her death or but for the incapacity due to the accident would have been so dependant. The effect of the foregoing is that the present Panel can only take away the rights of action of the Plaintiffs listed in this action who were dependant on the worker at the time of his death. In the letter of August 16, 1990, the parties were informed that this matter would be an issue for determination by the Panel. At the time of the hearing of the application, no evidence was adduced by either side as to the dependant status of the Plaintiffs. The Applicants' (Plaintiffs') Statement included several statements of fact pertaining to the Dependant status of the Plaintiffs. Subsequent to the hearing of the application the parties were invited by the Panel to make further submissions on this point. Counsel for the Applicants submitted that the worker's widow and his two children were Dependants under the Act, but that the worker's father was not. The Respondents indicated in their reply to the Panel that in their view, the matter had been resolved in the letter of August 16, As things stand, the Panel feels that it is unable, at this point, to rule on the question of who is affected by our ruling as to the employment status of the late worker. The Applicants appear satisfied to have a ruling based on the alleged facts contained in the Applicants' Statement and the Panel is satisfied with the Applicants' position in this regard. However, the Respondent appears not to have addressed the issue in a manner that sets out their position. If the Panel were to rule as submitted by the Applicants' counsel, the right of action of the deceased worker's father would continue to exist while the right of action of the deceased worker's widow and two children would be barred. In our view, it is incumbent upon the Respondent to indicate to the Panel what submissions and/or evidence it wishes to adduce on this issue.
10 7 Consequently, the Panel will delay issuing a final decision in this application pending final submissions from the parties on the question of the effect of our ruling on the employment status of the deceased worker. THE DECISION The Panel declares as follows: 1. the deceased worker, Rudy Barton Jr., was in the course of his employment at the time of his fatal injury on March 10, 1989; 2. the legal actions commenced by the dependants of Rudy Barton Jr. are barred by subsection 10(9) of the Act; and 3. the question of who constitutes a dependant of Rudy Barton Jr. for the purposes of the Workers' Compensation Act will be addressed in a further decision upon completion of submissions by the parties on this question. The parties are to have four weeks from the date of this decision to provide such evidence and submissions as they feel are necessary to enable the Panel to resolve this matter. The parties are then to have a further two weeks to file reply submissions. Counsel for the interested third party, Canadian Airlines, is to be giving copies of the parties' submissions and may have two weeks to file reply submissions. Upon receipt of the parties additional evidence and submissions, the Panel will issue a final decision. DATED at Toronto, this 9th day of October, SIGNED: J.P. Moore, R.H. Apsey, F. Jackson.
FD: FD: DT:D DN: 846/93 STY:Holt Renfrew Canada v. Nicol PANEL: Moore; Jackson; Chapman DDATE: ACT: KEYW: Right to sue (wrongful dismissal).
FD: FD: DT:D DN: 846/93 STY:Holt Renfrew Canada v. Nicol PANEL: Moore; Jackson; Chapman DDATE:130694 ACT: KEYW: Right to sue (wrongful dismissal). SUM: The defendant in a civil case applied to determine
More informationFD: FD: DT:D DN: 357/93 STY:Ontario Hydro v. Frontier Hydraulics Ltd. PANEL: Faubert; M. Cook; Ronson DDATE: ACT: *10(12) KEYW: Right to sue
FD: FD: DT:D DN: 357/93 STY:Ontario Hydro v. Frontier Hydraulics Ltd. PANEL: Faubert; M. Cook; Ronson DDATE:220793 ACT: *10(12) KEYW: Right to sue (third party claims); Damages, contribution or indemnity.
More informationFD: FD: DT:D DN: 977/88 STY: HRYHORUK v. EASBY PANEL: Strachan; Cook; Nipshagen DDATE: ACT: 15, 8(9) KEYW: Section 15 application; In the
FD: FD: DT:D DN: 977/88 STY: HRYHORUK v. EASBY PANEL: Strachan; Cook; Nipshagen DDATE: 100489 ACT: 15, 8(9) KEYW: Section 15 application; In the course of employment (reasonably incidental activity test);
More informationFD: FD: DT: D DN: 637/93 STY: Sharman v. Allard PANEL: Moore; M. Cook; Chapman DDATE: ACT: KEYW: Right to sue; In the course of employment
FD: FD: DT: D DN: 637/93 STY: Sharman v. Allard PANEL: Moore; M. Cook; Chapman DDATE: 040595 ACT: KEYW: Right to sue; In the course of employment (travelling); Employer (definition of) (contract of hiring);
More informationFD: FD: DT:D DN: 211/88 STY: GREEN FOREST LUMBER LTD. et al. v. FORSTER et al and one other action PANEL: Newman; Cook; Apsey DDATE: ACT: 15;
FD: FD: DT:D DN: 211/88 STY: GREEN FOREST LUMBER LTD. et al. v. FORSTER et al and one other action PANEL: Newman; Cook; Apsey DDATE: 040688 ACT: 15; 8(9) KEYW: Section 15 application; Independent operator;
More informationFD: ACN=4836 ACC=R FD: DT:D DN: 816/87 STY:Pritchett et al. v. O'Sullivan et al. PANEL: Thomas; Robillard; Preston DDATE: ACT: 15, 8(9),
FD: ACN=4836 ACC=R FD: DT:D DN: 816/87 STY:Pritchett et al. v. O'Sullivan et al. PANEL: Thomas; Robillard; Preston DDATE: 021087 ACT: 15, 8(9), 8(10), 8(11) KEYW: Right to sue; Supplier of motor vehicle,
More informationDECISION NUMBER 345 / 91 SUMMARY
DECISION NUMBER 345 / 91 SUMMARY W was the owner of two companies, an outpost camping company and a commercial air service which transported clients to the camp sites. R was an employee of the camping
More informationFD: FD: DT:D DN: 650/91 STY:N. Turk Investments Ltd. v. Opar PANEL: Hartman; Ferrari; Chapman DDATE: ACT: KEYW: Right to sue; In the course of
FD: FD: DT:D DN: 650/91 STY:N. Turk Investments Ltd. v. Opar PANEL: Hartman; Ferrari; Chapman DDATE: 080792 ACT: KEYW: Right to sue; In the course of employment (parking lots). SUM: The defendants in a
More informationThe right of action was taken away since the parties were in the course of employment at the time of the accident. [10 pages]
DECISION NO. 270 / 93 SUMMARY Right to sue; In the course of employment (parking lots); Legal precedent (consistency). The defendant in a civil case applied to determine whether the plaintiffs right of
More informationRight to sue; In the course of employment (proceeding to and from work).
SUMMARY 892/91 DECISION NO. 892/91 Brunino v. Principe PANEL: McCombie; Thomspon; Nipshagen DATE: 11/05/92 Right to sue; In the course of employment (proceeding to and from work). Two defendants in a civil
More informationNOVA SCOTIA WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS TRIBUNAL
NOVA SCOTIA WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS TRIBUNAL Applicant: [X] Respondents: [X] and The Workers Compensation Board of Nova Scotia (Board) SECTION 29 APPLICATION DECISION Representatives: [X] Action:
More informationBY-LAW NO. 44 ONTARIO COLLEGE OF SOCIAL WORKERS AND SOCIAL SERVICE WORKERS - RULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE OF THE DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE
BY-LAW NO. 44 OF ONTARIO COLLEGE OF SOCIAL WORKERS AND SOCIAL SERVICE WORKERS - RULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE OF THE DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OCSWSSW - Discipline Committee Rules of Procedure Index Page
More informationNoteworthy Decision Summary. Decision: WCAT RB Panel: Teresa White Decision Date: March 23, 2005
Noteworthy Decision Summary Decision: WCAT-2005-01460-RB Panel: Teresa White Decision Date: March 23, 2005 Extension of time Election Section 10 of the Workers Compensation Act Policy item #111.22 of the
More informationRULES OF PROCEDURE OF THE DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE COLLEGE OF REGISTERED PSYCHOTHERAPISTS AND REGISTERED MENTAL HEALTH THERAPISTS OF ONTARIO INDEX
RULES OF PROCEDURE OF THE DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE COLLEGE OF REGISTERED PSYCHOTHERAPISTS AND REGISTERED MENTAL HEALTH THERAPISTS OF ONTARIO INDEX RULE 1 - INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION... 3 1.01 Definitions...
More informationBEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM F CURTIS H. STOUT, INC., EMPLOYER RESPONDENT NO. 1
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM F214059 CARLOS HONEYSUCKLE, DECEASED, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT CURTIS H. STOUT, INC., EMPLOYER RESPONDENT NO. 1 VALLEY VORGE INSURANCE CO., INSURANCE
More informationCOURT OF APPEAL FOR BRITISH COLUMBIA
COURT OF APPEAL FOR BRITISH COLUMBIA Between: Date: 20120215 Docket: CA039639 Ingrid Andrea Franzke And Appellant (Petitioner) Workers' Compensation Appeal Tribunal Respondent (Defendant) Before: The Honourable
More informationTHE TORONTO LICENSING TRIBUNAL
THE TORONTO LICENSING TRIBUNAL BY-LAW NO. 1 (as amended January 16, 2014) RULES OF PROCEDURE To Govern the Proceedings of the Toronto Licensing Tribunal DEFINITIONS 1. In these Rules, unless the context
More informationWORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL
2003 ONWSIAT 1955 WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 234/03 [1] This right to sue application was heard in London on February 4, 2003, by Vice-Chair M. Kenny. THE RIGHT TO SUE
More informationCIVIL AVIATION AUTHORITY REGULATIONS 1972
CIVIL AVIATION AUTHORITY REGULATIONS 1972 JERSEY REVISED EDITION OF THE LAWS 03.875 APPENDIX 3 Jersey R & O 5717 Civil Aviation Act 1971. CIVIL AVIATION AUTHORITY REGULATIONS 1972. (Registered on the
More informationWORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL
2004 ONWSIAT 2252 WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1562/02 [1] This right to sue application was heard in Toronto on November 7, 2002, by a Panel consisting of: N.A. Ross :
More informationTechnical Standards and Safety Authority. Rules of Practice
Technical Standards and Safety Authority Rules of Practice APPEALS FILED UNDER SUBSECTION 22.(1) OF THE TECHNICAL STANDARDS & SAFETY ACT, 2000, S.O. 2000, CHAPTER 16 April, 2008 TABLE OF CONTENT TSSA Rules
More informationWORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 955/09
WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 955/09 BEFORE: J. Josefo: Vice-Chair HEARING: May 13, 2009 at Ottawa Oral DATE OF DECISION: June 16, 2009 NEUTRAL CITATION: 2009 ONWSIAT 1450
More informationCOUNSEL JUDGES. Carmody, Justice. Chavez and Moise, JJ., concur. Compton, C.J., and Noble, J., not participating. AUTHOR: CARMODY OPINION
BROWN V. ARAPAHOE DRILLING CO., 1962-NMSC-051, 70 N.M. 99, 370 P.2d 816 (S. Ct. 1962) Bessie BROWN, Widow of Edward Lee Brown, Deceased, and parent of David Clyde Brown, Randy Lee Brown and Robert Donald
More informationREASONS FOR DECISION OF THE TORONTO LICENSING TRIBUNAL
REASONS FOR DECISION OF THE TORONTO LICENSING TRIBUNAL Date of Hearing: Panel: Re: Aly N. Alibhai, Chair; Moira Calderwood and Cezary Paluch, Members Muhammad Umar Tariq Holder of Taxicab Driver's Licence
More informationRULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE
Financial Services Tribunal Tribunal des services financiers RULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE FOR PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE FINANCIAL SERVICES TRIBUNAL Ce document est également disponible en français TABLE
More informationTITLE 23: EDUCATION AND CULTURAL RESOURCES SUBTITLE A: EDUCATION CHAPTER I: STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION SUBCHAPTER n: DISPUTE RESOLUTION
ISBE 23 ILLINOIS ADMINISTRATIVE CODE 475 TITLE 23: EDUCATION AND CULTURAL RESOURCES : EDUCATION CHAPTER I: STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION : DISPUTE RESOLUTION PART 475 CONTESTED CASES AND OTHER FORMAL HEARINGS
More informationTerms and Conditions of Petron Fuel and Fly Epic Asia Contest
Terms and Conditions of Petron Fuel and Fly Epic Asia Contest Organiser: 1. Petron Fuel International Sdn Bhd ( Company ) is the organiser of this Petron Fuel and Fly Epic Asia Contest ( Contest ). Eligibility:
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE LUIS JARVIS. Trading as L & J Production AND AMERICAN EAGLE AIRLINES INC.
ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CLAIM NO. ANUHCV 2004/0465 BETWEEN LUIS JARVIS Trading as L & J Production AND AMERICAN EAGLE AIRLINES INC. Appearances: Mr. Steadroy Benjamin and Mr. Damien
More informationWORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1086/15
WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1086/15 BEFORE: R. McCutcheon: Vice-Chair HEARING: May 28, 2015 at Toronto Oral hearing Post-hearing activity completed on September 10, 2015
More informationONTARIO LABOUR RELATIONS BOARD INFORMATION BULLETIN NO. 32
ONTARIO LABOUR RELATIONS BOARD INFORMATION BULLETIN NO. 32 Resolving Disputes in Displacement and Termination Applications in the Construction Industry during the Construction Open Period This Information
More informationPART 4221 ARBITRATION OF DIS- PUTES IN MULTIEMPLOYER PLANS
4220.4 has been assigned, that fact must be indicated. (3) A copy of the amendment as adopted, including its proposed effective date. (4) A copy of the most recent actuarial valuation of the plan. (5)
More informationNOTICE OF CERTIFICATION, OBJECTION PROCESS AND SETTLEMENT APPROVAL HEARING LONG FORM NOTICE
NOTICE OF CERTIFICATION, OBJECTION PROCESS AND SETTLEMENT APPROVAL HEARING LONG FORM NOTICE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF THE EI SICKNESS BENEFITS CLASS ACTION Did you apply for, and were denied, a conversion
More informationRULES OF PROCEDURE OF THE DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THECOLLEGE OF PHYSICIANS AND SURGEONS OF ONTARIO INDEX
October 1, 1996 Last Update: February 23, 2018 Index Page 1 RULES OF PROCEDURE OF THE DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THECOLLEGE OF PHYSICIANS AND SURGEONS OF ONTARIO INDEX RULE 1 - INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION...
More informationTHE LEGAL DRIVING AGE IN ILLINOIS
1 2 3 4 GREAT 4-H DEBATE 5 6 7 BILL 1 8 9 10 11 THE LEGAL DRIVING AGE IN ILLINOIS SHALL BE RAISED FROM 16 TO 18. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 BILL 1: THE LEGAL DRIVING AGE IN ILLINOIS SHALL
More informationb) the Member s principal residence is outside Winnipeg, and
Commuter Allowance Eligibility Non-Winnipeg Members are entitled to reimbursement of authorized commuting expenses if: a) the Member represents a constituency wholly outside Winnipeg, and b) the Member
More informationThe Law Society of British Columbia In the matter of the Legal Profession Act, SBC 1998, c.9 and a hearing concerning. Gary Russell Vlug.
2010 LSBC 16 Report issued: July 22, 2010 Citation issued: March 5, 2009 The Law Society of British Columbia In the matter of the Legal Profession Act, SBC 1998, c.9 and a hearing concerning Gary Russell
More informationSUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE DIVISIONAL COURT
Page 1 of 15 Home Feedback Site Map Français Home Court of Appeal for Ontario Superior Court of Justice Ontario Court of Justice Location Superior Court of Justice Divisional Court Appeal Information Package
More informationJustice Court Precinct 8 Judge Tom Gillam III Justice of the Peace JUSTICE COURT PROCEDURES SMALL CLAIMS
Justice Court Precinct 8 Judge Tom Gillam III Justice of the Peace JUSTICE COURT PROCEDURES SMALL CLAIMS Justice of the Peace Courts are courts in which parties can settle disputes in a speedy, informal
More informationThe Public Guardian and Trustee Act
1 The Public Guardian and Trustee Act being Chapter P-36.3* of the Statutes of Saskatchewan, 1983 (effective April 1, 1984) as amended by the Statutes of Saskatchewan, 1984-85-86, c.34 and 105; 1988-89,
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF BELIZE, A.D and A.D BETWEEN: (RANDOLPH HOPE PLAINTIFF ( ( AND (
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BELIZE, A.D. 1998 and A.D. 2003 CLAIM NO: 55 OF 1998 CLAIM NO: 60 OF 2003 CLAIM NO: 55 OF 1998 BETWEEN: (RANDOLPH HOPE PLAINTIFF ( ( AND ( (CHARLES MCINTOSH DEFENDANT CLAIM NO:
More informationWORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1945/10
WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1945/10 BEFORE: HEARING: J. P. Moore : Vice-Chair B. Davis : Member Representative of Employers A. Grande : Member Representative of Workers
More informationRULES OF PROCEDURE OF THE FITNESS TO PRACTISE COMMITTEE OF THE ONTARIO COLLEGE OF SOCIAL WORKERS AND SOCIAL SERVICE WORKERS INDEX
RULES OF PROCEDURE OF THE FITNESS TO PRACTISE COMMITTEE OF THE ONTARIO COLLEGE OF SOCIAL WORKERS AND SOCIAL SERVICE WORKERS INDEX RULE 1 INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION... 1 1.01 Definitions... 1 1.02 Interpretations
More informationREVOKED AS OF APRIL 11, 2016
MSA Hearing Procedures Table of Contents PART 1 INTERPRETATION 1 Definitions 2 Application of Procedures PART 2 GENERAL MATTERS 3 Directions 4 Setting of time limits and extending or abridging time 5 Variation
More informationM. Orr ) Thursday, the 15th day Deputy Mining and Lands Commissioner ) of October, THE CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT
File No. CA 005-09 M. Orr ) Thursday, the 15th day Deputy Mining and Lands Commissioner ) of October, 2009. THE CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT IN THE MATTER OF An appeal to the Minister under subsection
More informationReasons and Decision Motifs et décision
IMMIGRATION AND REFUGEE BOARD OF CANADA IMMIGRATION APPEAL DIVISION COMMISSION DE L IMMIGRATION ET DU STATUT DE RÉFUGIÉ DU CANADA SECTION D APPEL DE L IMMIGRATION Appellant(s) IAD File No. / N o de dossier
More informationWORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1806/09
WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1806/09 BEFORE: J. P. Moore : Vice-Chair HEARING: June 17, 2010 at Toronto Oral DATE OF DECISION: July 27, 2010 NEUTRAL CITATION: 2010 ONWSIAT
More informationCORONERS COURT NOTICE OF MOTION FOR ADJOURNMENT. IN THE MATTER OF the Coroners Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.37;
CORONERS COURT IN THE MATTER OF the Coroners Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.37; AND IN THE MATTER OF the Inquest Concerning the Death of Romeo Wesley NOTICE OF MOTION FOR ADJOURNMENT TAKE NOTICE that Cat Lake First
More informationBARBADOS SEVERANCE PAYMENTS CHAPTER 355A ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS
BARBADOS SEVERANCE PAYMENTS CHAPTER 355A SECTION ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I Preliminary 1. Short title. 2. Interpretation. PART II Severance Payments 3. General provisions as to right to severance
More informationConflict of Laws - Jurisdiction Over Nonresidents - Constructive Service in Tort Action Arising Outside the State
Louisiana Law Review Volume 14 Number 3 April 1954 Conflict of Laws - Jurisdiction Over Nonresidents - Constructive Service in Tort Action Arising Outside the State Harold J. Brouillette Repository Citation
More informationMalaysian Aviation Commission (Amendment) 1 A BILL. i n t i t u l e d. An Act to amend the Malaysian Aviation Commission Act 2015.
Malaysian Aviation Commission (Amendment) 1 A BILL i n t i t u l e d An Act to amend the Malaysian Aviation Commission Act 2015. [ ] ENACTED by the Parliament of Malaysia as follows: Short title and commencement
More informationUNITED JEWISH APPEAL OF GREATER TORONTO MISSION ISRAEL 2014 October 26 th to November 2 st, 2014
UNITED JEWISH APPEAL OF GREATER TORONTO MISSION ISRAEL 2014 October 26 th to November 2 st, 2014 APPLICATION FORM (one per person) All pricing is subject to change due to airfare and currency fluctuations
More informationPROCEDURAL GUIDELINES FOR HEARINGS BEFORE THE MINING AND LANDS COMMISSIONER
PROCEDURAL GUIDELINES FOR HEARINGS BEFORE THE MINING AND LANDS COMMISSIONER Office of the Mining and Lands Commissioner Box 330, 24th Floor, 700 Bay Street Toronto, Ontario M5G 126 Table of Contents PROCEDURAL
More informationNo Plaintiffs and Appellants, Defendants and Respondents.
No. 80-80 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 1980 ESTHER KNOEPKE, et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, SOUTHWESTERN RAILWAY CO., et al., Defendants and Respondents. Appeal from: District Court
More informationCOURT OF QUEEN S BENCH OF MANITOBA
Date: 20181121 Docket: CI 16-01-04438 (Winnipeg Centre) Indexed as: Shirritt-Beaumont v. Frontier School Division Cited as: 2018 MBQB 177 COURT OF QUEEN S BENCH OF MANITOBA BETWEEN: ) APPEARANCES: ) RAYMOND
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. and EAGLE AIR SERVICES LTD. FELICIA ANDRINA GEORGE. and EAGLE AIR SERVICES LTD.
ST LUCIA IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CIVIL SUIT NO. 375 OF 1993 BETWEEN: AGATHA HENRY and EAGLE AIR SERVICES LTD. Plaintiff Defendant CIVIL SUIT NO. 411 OF 1993 BETWEEN: Appearances: FELICIA ANDRINA GEORGE
More informationYukon Corrections: Adult Custody Policy Manual. B 4.1 Inmate Disciplinary Process Approved by: Revised: February 9, 2018
STATEMENT OF POLICY This policy sets out the philosophy, options and process for the discipline of inmates, including informal methods of correcting behaviour and formal hearings and disposition of institutional
More informationOFFICIAL CALL TO THE 2018 GLOBALIZATION LEADERSHIP INSTITUTE. August 26-31, 2018 UAW Walter and May Reuther Family Education Center Onaway, Michigan
OFFICIAL CALL TO THE 2018 GLOBALIZATION LEADERSHIP INSTITUTE August 26-31, 2018 UAW Walter and May Reuther Family Education Center Onaway, Michigan The UAW Education Department will hold its Globalization
More informationREASONS FOR DECISION OF THE TORONTO LICENSING TRIBUNAL
REASONS FOR DECISION OF THE TORONTO LICENSING TRIBUNAL Date of Hearing: Panel: Aly N. Alibhai (Chair); (Hedy) Anna Walsh and Keith Cooper, Members Re: Kevin Singh (Report No. 6888) Applicant for a Tow
More informationIn the matter of an Application pursuant to subsection 280(2) of the Insurance Act, RSO 1990, c I.8., in relation to statutory accident benefits. G.K.
Safety, Licensing Appeals and Standards Tribunals Ontario Licence Appeal Tribunal Tribunaux de la sécurité, des appels en matière de permis et des normes Ontario Tribunal d'appel en matière de permis Automobile
More information47064 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 171 / Thursday, September 3, 1998 / Notices
47064 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 171 / Thursday, September 3, 1998 / Notices Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
More informationREGULATIONS GOVERNING THE PER DIEM AND MILEAGE ACT ISSUING AGENCY: Department of Finance and Administration. [ NMAC - N, 07/01/03]
TITLE 2 CHAPTER 42 PART 2 PUBLIC FINANCE TRAVEL AND PER DIEM REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE PER DIEM AND MILEAGE ACT 2.42.2.1 ISSUING AGENCY: Department of Finance and Administration. [2.42.2.1 NMAC - N, 07/01/03]
More informationSUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON FOR KING COUNTY., Counsel of Record. The following interrogatories are pattern interrogatories, which the undersigned
, SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON FOR KING COUNTY Plaintiff, Case No. 1 v., Defendant. DEFENDANT TO PLAINTIFF TO: AND TO:, Plaintiff;, Counsel of Record. The following interrogatories are pattern interrogatories,
More informationCase Name: Laudon v. Roberts. Between Rick Laudon, Plaintiff, and Will Roberts and Keith Sullivan, Defendants. [2007] O.J. No.
Page 1 Case Name: Laudon v. Roberts Between Rick Laudon, Plaintiff, and Will Roberts and Keith Sullivan, Defendants [2007] O.J. No. 1414 156 A.C.W.S. (3d) 844 49 C.P.C. (6th) 311 2007 CarswellOnt 2191
More informationCase 1:11-cv WMN Document 59 Filed 03/21/13 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
Case 1:11-cv-03562-WMN Document 59 Filed 03/21/13 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND BLIND INDUSTRIES AND * SERVICES OF MARYLAND et al. * * v. * * Civil Action
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Citation: R. v. Black, 2006 BCSC 1357 Regina v. Date: Docket: Registry: Kelowna 2006 BCSC 1357
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Citation: R. v. Black, 2006 BCSC 1357 Regina v. Date: 20060901 Docket: 57596 Registry: Kelowna Ronda Petra Black Before: The Honourable Madam Justice Humphries
More information1996 No (L.5) IMMIGRATION. The Asylum Appeals (Procedure) Rules 1996
STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS 1996 No. 2070 (L.5) IMMIGRATION The Asylum Appeals (Procedure) Rules 1996 Made 6th August 1996 Laid before Parliament 7th August 1996 Coming into force 1st September 1996 The Lord
More informationCHAPTER 10 - INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION SUBCHAPTER 10A - WORKERS' COMPENSATION RULES SECTION ADMINISTRATION
CHAPTER 10 - INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION SUBCHAPTER 10A - WORKERS' COMPENSATION RULES SECTION.0100 - ADMINISTRATION 04 NCAC 10A.0101 LOCATION OF MAIN OFFICE AND HOURS OF BUSINESS The main office of the North
More informationPapers Numbered Notice of Motion and Affidavits Annexed 4 Order to Show Cause 1 Answering Affidavits 2 Replying Affidavits 3 Exhibits
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Index No.:80357/2007 COUNTY OF RICHMOND DCM PART 3 Motion No.:001 In the Matter of the Application of FORMICA CONSTRUCTION INC., ROSEMARIE FORMICA, WILLIAM FORMICA,
More informationArbitration Agreement ADR Systems File # xxxxxxxxxxx Insurance Claim # xxxxxxxxxx
Arbitration Agreement ADR Systems File # xxxxxxxxxxx Insurance Claim # xxxxxxxxxx I. Parties A. xxxxxxxxxxxxxx B. xxxxxxxxxxxxxx II., Time and Location of the Arbitration : Time: Location: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More informationUME ACADEMIC APPEALS POLICY
UME ACADEMIC APPEALS POLICY Responsible Office(s): UME Responsible Officer(s): Associate Dean UME Director, Assessment and Program Evaluation Version: 5.0 Approved by: Lakehead Senate May 11, 2016 Laurentian
More informationOffice Consolidation Brampton Appeal Tribunal By-law A By-law to create the Brampton Appeal Tribunal and to establish its Rules of Procedure
Office Consolidation Brampton Appeal Tribunal By-law 48-2008 A By-law to create the Brampton Appeal Tribunal and to establish its Rules of Procedure (as amended by By-laws 78-2009, 340-2012, 332-2013,
More informationNova Scotia Department of Health Continuing Care Branch. Financial Decision Review Policy
Nova Scotia Department of Health Continuing Care Branch Subject: Financial Decision Review Policy Approved On: May 30, 2005. Replaces Policy Dated: January 31, 2005. Approved By: Original Signed By Keith
More informationI. ZNAMENSKY SELEKCIONNO-GIBRIDNY CENTER LLC V.
(Press control and right arrow for the same effect) (Press control and left arrow for the same effect) znamensky X Français English Home > Ontario > Superior Court of Justice > 2009 CanLII 51197
More informationASSOCIATION POLICY. ISBA EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT POLICY (Revised and Effective December 7, 2015) I. MEMBERS. A. General Provisions. 1.
ASSOCIATION POLICY ISBA EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT POLICY (Revised and Effective December 7, 2015) I. MEMBERS A. General Provisions 1. Applicability These general provisions apply to all member expenses eligible
More information1. "Applicant" means a person applying for registration under this chapter.
IOWA 9D.1 Definitions. 1. "Applicant" means a person applying for registration under this chapter. 2. "Customer" means a person who is offered or who purchases travel services. 3. "Registrant" means a
More informationTHE PHI KAPPA TAU FRATERNITY CLAIM AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION PLAN AND RULES
CLAIM AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION PLAN AND RULES CLAIM AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION PLAN 1. Purpose and Construction The Plan is designed to provide for the quick, fair, accessible, and inexpensive resolution of
More informationIN THE MATTER OF the Health Care Consent Act, 1996 R.S.O. 1990, chapter M.7 as amended
IN THE MATTER OF the Health Care Consent Act, 1996 R.S.O. 1990, chapter M.7 as amended 17-2884-01 17-2884-02 AND IN THE MATTER OF TP A patient at UNIVERSITY HEALTH NETWORK TORONTO WESTERN HOSPITAL TORONTO,
More informationCase 2:05-cv AJM-ALC Document 53 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 1 of 19 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
Case 2:05-cv-03066-AJM-ALC Document 53 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 1 of 19 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA SHERRY PETERS KERN * CIVIL ACTION VERSUS * NO: 05-3066 BLAINE KERN ARTISTS,
More information[Code Secs and 6415]
US-DIST-CT, [74-1 USTC 16,135], U. S. District Court, East. Dist. Ark., West. Div., Petit Jean Air Service, Inc., Plaintiff v. The United States of America, Defendant, Transportation of persons (air) tax:
More informationVOLUNTARY ADMISSION BY NAPP
CASE AUTH/2353/8/10 VOLUNTARY ADMISSION BY NAPP Provision of business class travel Napp Pharmaceuticals voluntarily admitted that it had provided business class air travel to delegates attending a congress
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA STANDING ORDER FOR CIVIL JURY TRIALS BEFORE DISTRICT JUDGE JON S.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA STANDING ORDER FOR CIVIL JURY TRIALS BEFORE DISTRICT JUDGE JON S. TIGAR A. Meeting and Disclosure Prior to Pretrial Conference At least
More informationCALIFORNIA RULES OF COURT Title 3. Civil Rules Division 8. Alternative Dispute Resolution Chapter 1. General Provisions
Page 1 Chapter 1. General Provisions Cal Rules of Court, Rule 3.800 (2009) Rule 3.800. Definitions As used in this division: (1) "Alternative dispute resolution process" or "ADR process" means a process,
More informationSCHENGEN VISA (Category A and Category C)
This document is free of charge November 2017 SCHENGEN VISA (Category A and Category C) Short-term Visa (for a maximum stay of 90 days) i nationals, living in the jurisdiction of the Embassy of the Federal
More informationGROUP VISA APPOINTMENT APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS
GROUP VISA APPOINTMENT APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS This guide is for students planning to participate in the group visa appointment. Before beginning this process students should review the group visa section
More informationU15 FOBISIA GAMES
2016 - U15 FOBISIA GAMES Visit Information Sheet Destination British School Manila Visit Leader: Ms Samantha Hill/shill@kellettschool.com Visit Administrator: Ms Vivian Wong / vivianwong@kellettschool.com
More informationCase Name: Beiko v. Hotel Dieu Hospital St. Catharines
Page 1 Case Name: Beiko v. Hotel Dieu Hospital St. Catharines Between Dr. George Beiko, Dr. Lawrence Aedy, Dr. Bruce Lennox and Dr. Gerald Scaife, Plaintiffs/Respondents, and Hotel Dieu Hospital St. Catharines,
More informationNAPERVILLE FLYING CLUB
NAPERVILLE FLYING CLUB POLICY AND PROCEDURE MANUAL NAPERVILLE FLYING CLUB POLICY AND PROCEDURE MANUAL I. MEMBERSHIP A. Official Prospect List The Club shall maintain an Official Prospect List ("OPL") of
More informationSETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
Ontario Commission des 22 nd Floor 22e étage Securities valeurs mobilières 20 Queen Street West 20, rue queen ouest Commission de l Ontario Toronto ON M5H 3S8 Toronto ON M5H 3S8 IN THE MATTER OF THE SECURITIES
More information2014 Bill 8. Third Session, 28th Legislature, 63 Elizabeth II THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ALBERTA BILL 8 JUSTICE STATUTES AMENDMENT ACT, 2014
2014 Bill 8 Third Session, 28th Legislature, 63 Elizabeth II THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ALBERTA BILL 8 JUSTICE STATUTES AMENDMENT ACT, 2014 MS KENNEDY-GLANS First Reading.......................................................
More information1. Summary. 2. Methodology
THE REALITY OF SETTLEMENT IN REGULATORY ENFORCEMENT CASES Joel Wiesenfeld and Celesse Dove * 1. Summary The vast majority of concluded regulatory enforcement cases at the Ontario Securities Commission
More informationARTICLE 8. SECTION 1. Section of the General Laws in Chapter entitled "Size,
======= art.00/ ======= ARTICLE 0 0 0 SECTION. Section -- of the General Laws in Chapter - entitled "Size, Weight, and Load Limits" is hereby amended to read as follows: --. Power to permit excess size
More informationGuide. Applying for Compensation for a Death. Social Justice Tribunals Ontario. Criminal Injuries Compensation Board
Social Justice Tribunals Ontario Providing fair and accessible justice Criminal Injuries Compensation Board Guide Applying for Compensation for a Death 0311E (2018/02) Disponible en français Page 1 of
More informationTHE JUDGES (REMUNERATION AND TERMINAL BENEFITS) ACT, 2007 PART I PART II
THE JUDGES (REMUNERATION AND TERMINAL BENEFITS) ACT, 2007 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS Section Title PART I PRELIMINARY PROVISIONS 1. Short title and commencement. 2. Application. 3. Interpretation. PART II
More informationThe Small Claims Act, 2016
1 SMALL CLAIMS, 2016 c S-50.12 The Small Claims Act, 2016 being Chapter S-50.12 of The Statutes of Saskatchewan, 2016 (effective January 1, 2018). *NOTE: Pursuant to subsection 33(1) of The Interpretation
More informationM. Orr ) Friday, the 30th day Deputy Mining and Lands Commissioner ) of April, THE MINING ACT
File No. MA 012-03 M. Orr ) Friday, the 30th day Deputy Mining and Lands Commissioner ) of April, 2004. THE MINING ACT IN THE MATTER OF Mining Claim TB-3006106, staked by Jason Heilman on the 29th day
More informationA Guide to the Ontario Hockey Federation Appeal Process. For Players, Volunteers, Administrators & Organizations
A Guide to the Ontario Hockey Federation Appeal Process For Players, Volunteers, Administrators & Organizations Revised 2015 Revised 2016 Table of Contents A Guide to the OHF Appeal Process... 3 Structure...
More informationBinding Mediation Agreement ADR Systems File # xxxxxxxxx Insurance Claim # xxxxxxxx
Binding Mediation Agreement ADR Systems File # xxxxxxxxx Insurance Claim # xxxxxxxx I. Parties A. xxxxxxxxxxxxxx B. xxxxxxxxxxxxxx II. Date, Time and Location of the Binding Mediation Date: Time: Location:
More informationARBITRATION RULES FOR THE TRANSPORTATION ADR COUNCIL
ARBITRATION RULES FOR THE TRANSPORTATION ADR COUNCIL TABLE OF CONTENTS I. THE RULES AS PART OF THE ARBITRATION AGREEMENT PAGES 1.1 Application... 1 1.2 Scope... 1 II. TRIBUNALS AND ADMINISTRATION 2.1 Name
More informationREPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE SUB-REGISTRY SAN FERNANDO NO. S 1950 OF 2003 BETWEEN CHRISTOPHER LA BORDE Plaintiff AND NATIONAL LOTTERIES CONTROL BOARD Defendant Before: The
More informationCook Islands: Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act 2003
The Asian Development Bank and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development do not guarantee the accuracy of this document and accept no responsibility whatsoever for any consequences of
More information