Indexed As: Hopkins v. Ventura Custom Homes Ltd. Manitoba Court of Appeal Hamilton, Chartier, C.J.M., and Beard, JJ.A. July 5, 2013.
|
|
- Jeffry Carson
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 William Eric Hopkins and Christa Leigh Hopkins (plaintiffs/respondents) v. Ventura Custom Homes Ltd. (defendant/appellant) (AI ; 2013 MBCA 67) Indexed As: Hopkins v. Ventura Custom Homes Ltd. Manitoba Court of Appeal Hamilton, Chartier, C.J.M., and Beard, JJ.A. July 5, Summary: The plaintiffs brought an action, alleging that, in violation of an implied term of an agreement between the parties, the materials used by and the workmanship of the defendant in the construction of the plaintiffs' new home, were not such that the finished product was fit for the purpose intended. The defendant applied for a stay of proceedings on the ground that, under the agreement, the dispute should be referred to arbitration. The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench, in a decision reported at 272 Man.R.(2d) 122, dismissed the application. The defendant appealed. The Manitoba Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and stayed the court proceedings under s. 7(1) of the Arbitration Act. Arbitration - Topic 161 Agreement to arbitrate - General - The Manitoba Court of Appeal reviewed the principles of interpretation of an arbitration clause and stated that "[t]he court's role in the interpretation of private arbitration clauses (or any contract, for that matter) is to give effect to the intentions of the parties as reflected in the words they have used.... adopting a broad and liberal approach to the interpretation of arbitration agreements has resulted in the principle that, if an arbitration clause is capable of two meanings, one of which provides for arbitration of the disagreement, the court will generally adopt that interpretation.... In summary, while the court's role in the interpretation of private arbitration clauses is to give effect to the intentions of the parties as reflected in their words, policy considerations in encouraging arbitration, and a generally broad and liberal attitude by the courts in favour of arbitration, where that option has been chosen, will impact the interpretation in any given case." - See paragraphs 58 to 64. Arbitration - Topic 2504 Stay of proceedings - Arbitration clause - Enforcement of - The plaintiffs brought an action, alleging that, in violation of an implied term of an agreement between the parties, the materials used by and the workmanship of the defendant in the construction of the plaintiffs' new home, were not such that the finished product was fit for the purpose intended - The defendant applied for a stay of proceedings on the ground that, under the agreement, the dispute should be referred to arbitration - The motion judge dismissed the application, finding that the arbitration clause did not have application by interpreting clauses 10.1 and 10.2 to apply only to disputes that arose during the course of
2 construction, but not to disputes arising thereafter - The defendant appealed - The Manitoba Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and stayed the court proceedings under s. 7(1) of the Arbitration Act - While the motion judge applied the general principles of contractual interpretation, he did not consider or apply any of the principles related specifically to the interpretation of contractual arbitration clauses - The broader, more liberal, interpretation, and that which was equally, if not more, in keeping with the wording of clauses 10.1 and 10.2, would be to read the two clauses as separate provisions, rather than using the wording of clause 10.1 to limit the interpretation of clause As a result, he did not apply the correct legal principles - The failure to apply the correct legal principles was a question of law and was reviewable on a standard of correctness - The motion judge erred in law in his interpretation of the arbitration clauses of the Agreement by failing to consider the correct principles of contractual interpretation as they relate to the interpretation of the arbitration provisions of the Agreement - See paragraphs 68 to 84. Stay of proceedings - When available - The plaintiffs brought an action, alleging that, in violation of an implied term of an agreement between the parties, the materials used by and the workmanship of the defendant in the construction of the plaintiffs' new home, were not such that the finished product was fit for the purpose intended - The defendant applied for a stay of proceedings on the ground that, under the agreement, the dispute should be referred to arbitration - The motion judge dismissed the application, applying s. 6(c) of the Arbitration Act to find the court intervention was necessary to prevent unfair and unequal treatment of one party to the agreement - The defendant appealed - The Manitoba Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and stayed the court proceedings under s. 7(1) of the Act - The motion judge's invocation of s. 6 was premised on his finding that it would be unfair and absurd to have the area representative of the National Home Warranty Program appointed as the arbitrator of disputes arising after the plaintiffs took possession of the house, due to the potential for bias on the part of the area representative - The motion judge did not take into account the correct principles of contractual interpretation, the purpose of the Act, or the intention of the legislature in enacting the legislation - Thus, he failed to consider and apply the correct legal principles regarding the interpretation and application of the Act - As a result of this misdirection, no deference was owed to his decision to invoke s. 6(c) - The Act had provisions governing the appointment of arbitrators and its challenges - In this case, the dispute between the parties did not lead to the conclusion that proceeding with the arbitration would be fruitless or necessarily lead to an ineffective arbitration process - The motion judge erred in invoking s. 6 to refuse to grant a stay of the court proceedings - See paragraphs 85 to 89. Stay of proceedings - When available - The plaintiffs brought an action, alleging that, in violation of an implied term of an agreement between the parties, the materials used by and the workmanship of the defendant in the construction of the plaintiffs' new home, were not such that the finished product was fit for the purpose intended - The defendant applied for a stay of proceedings on the ground that, under the agreement, the dispute
3 should be referred to arbitration - The motion judge dismissed the application, finding that because the agreement had no application, the court could refuse the stay under s. 7(2)(b) of the Arbitration Act - The defendant appealed - The Manitoba Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and stayed the court proceedings under s. 7(1) of the Act - Despite the motion judge's ruling, he did not find "that at least one of the criteria listed in s. 7(2) is met", that is, he did not find that "the arbitration agreement [or clauses, in this case] is invalid", as was required by s. 7(2)(b) - In fact, he found that the agreement, including the arbitration clauses, was valid - He then proceeded to interpret the arbitration clauses to find that they did not apply - Given that the motion judge did not find that either the agreement, or the arbitration clauses, was invalid, he clearly misdirected himself as to the interpretation of s. 7(2)(b) of the Act and, thereby, committed an error of law - As a result, no deference was owed to his decision - There was no basis under s. 7(2) of the Act to refuse the stay of the court proceedings under s. 7(1) - See paragraphs 90 to 97. Stay of proceedings - When available - [See Arbitration - Topic 2504]. Arbitration - Topic 8704 Judicial review - Practice - Appeals - Jurisdiction - The plaintiffs brought an action, alleging that, in violation of an implied term of an agreement between the parties, the materials used by and the workmanship of the defendant in the construction of the plaintiffs' new home, were not such that the finished product was fit for the purpose intended - The defendant applied for a stay of proceedings on the ground that, under the agreement, the dispute should be referred to arbitration - The motion judge dismissed the application - The defendant appealed - At issue was, inter alia, whether the court had jurisdiction to entertain the appeal - The motion judge's decision was made under s. 7 of the Arbitration Act - Under s. 7(6), there was no appeal from a court's decision under s. 7 - The Manitoba Court of Appeal held that it had jurisdiction to hear the appeal - Some decisions under s. 7 were subject to appeal, and it was important to determine the exact nature of both the question under appeal and the underlying dispute in order to determine the applicability of s. 7(6) and whether there was jurisdiction to entertain an appeal - Here, the motion judge concluded that the arbitration clauses were valid, but that their application was limited to disputes arising during the construction period and did not extend to disputes arising after that time - He found that the dispute arose after the construction was complete and the plaintiffs had taken possession; therefore, it was not subject to the arbitration clause - Having found that the dispute was not subject to arbitration, the result was that his decision fell outside the scope of s. 7 and an appeal from that decision was not barred by s. 7(6) - See paragraphs 43 to 49. Cases Noticed: Burlington Northern Railroad Co. v. Canadian National Railway Co. (1995), 59 B.C.A.C. 97; 98 W.A.C. 97 (C.A.), revd. [1997] 1 S.C.R. 5; 207 N.R. 243; 85 B.C.A.C. 161; 138 W.A.C. 161, refd to. [para. 15]. Ontario v. Ontario First Nations Limited Partnership (2004), 191 O.A.C. 269; 73 O.R. (3d) 439 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 16]. Bloomer Hotel Corp. et al. v. Boehm Hotel Corp. et al. (2009), 240 Man.R.(2d) 69; 456
4 W.A.C. 69; 2009 MBCA 68, refd to. [para. 16]. Ontario v. Imperial Tobacco Canada Ltd. et al. (2011), 281 O.A.C. 329; 2011 ONCA 525, refd to. [para. 16]. Heyman v. Darwins Ltd., [1942] A.C. 356 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 20]. Injector Wrap Corp. v. Agrico Canada Ltd. (1990), 67 Man.R.(2d) 158 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 20]. Hnatiuk et al. v. Court et al. (2010), 251 Man.R.(2d) 178; 478 W.A.C. 178; 2010 MBCA 20, refd to. [para. 20]. Consolidated-Bathurst Export Ltd. v. Mutual Boiler and Machinery Insurance Co., [1980] 1 S.C.R. 888; 32 N.R. 488, refd to. [para. 22]. Moore (Geoffrey L.) Realty Inc. v. Manitoba Motor League (2003), 173 Man.R.(2d) 300; 293 W.A.C. 300; 2003 MBCA 71, refd to. [para. 22]. Manulife Bank of Canada v. Conlin et al., [1996] 3 S.C.R. 415; 203 N.R. 81; 94 O.A.C. 161, refd to. [para. 31]. Mantini v. Smith Lyons LLP et al. (2003), 174 O.A.C. 138; 64 O.R.(3d) 505 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 44]. SNC-SNAM, G.P. v. Opron Maritimes Construction Ltd. et al. (2011), 386 N.B.R.(2d) 1; 999 A.P.R. 1; 336 D.L.R.(4th) 129; 2011 NBCA 60, refd to. [para. 44]. Griffin v. Dell Canada Inc. (2010), 259 O.A.C. 108; 98 O.R.(3d) 481; 2010 ONCA 29, refd to. [para. 44]. Clark (A.G.) Holdings Ltd. et al. v. HOOPP Realty Inc. (2013), 544 A.R. 114; 567 W.A.C. 114 ; 2013 ABCA 101, refd to. [para. 45]. Huras v. Primerica Financial Services Ltd. (2000), 137 O.A.C. 79 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 53]. Nazarinia Holdings Inc. et al. v Ontario Inc. et al., [2010] O.T.C. Uned. 1766; 2010 ONSC 1766, affd. [2010] O.A.C. Uned. 590; 2010 ONCA 739, refd to. [para. 53]. MDG Kingston Inc. et al. v. MDG Computers Canada Inc. et al. (2008), 241 O.A.C. 84; 92 O.R.(3d) ONCA 656, leave to appeal refused [2010] S.C.C.A. No. 94, refd to. [para. 53]. Bell Mobility Inc. v. MTS Allstream Inc. (2009), 236 Man.R.(2d) 167; 448 W.A.C. 167; 2009 MBCA 28, refd to. [para. 58]. Huras v. Primerica Financial Services Ltd. (2001), 148 O.A.C. 396; 55 O.R.(3d) 449 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 58]. Canadian National Railway Co. v. Lovat Tunnel Equipment Inc. (1999), 122 O.A.C. 171 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 62]. Bolands Ltd. et al. v. Smith (Ivan) Holdings Ltd. (2002), 210 N.S.R.(2d) 215; 659 A.P.R. 215; 2002 NSCA 146, refd to. [para. 62]. Wright v. Nova Scotia Public Service Long Term Disability Plan Trust Fund (2006), 246 N.S.R.(2d) 308; 780 A.P.R. 308; 2006 NSCA 101, refd to. [para. 62]. Seidel v. Telus Communications Inc., [2011] 1 S.C.R. 531; 412 N.R. 195; 301 B.C.A.C. 1; 510 W.A.C. 1; 2011 SCC 15, refd to. [para. 63]. Housen v. Nikolaisen et al., [2002] 2 S.C.R. 235; 286 N.R. 1; 219 Sask.R. 1; 272 W.A.C. 1; 2002 SCC 33, refd to. [para. 65]. Prairie Petroleum Products Ltd. v. Husky Oil Ltd. et al. (2008), 231 Man.R.(2d) 1; 437 W.A.C. 1; 2008 MBCA 87, refd to. [para. 65].
5 King v. Operating Engineers Training Institute of Manitoba Inc. (2011), 270 Man.R.(2d) 63; 524 W.A.C. 63; 2011 MBCA 80, refd to. [para. 65]. Telecommunication Employees Association of Manitoba Inc. et al. v. Manitoba Telecom Services Inc. et al. (2012), 275 Man.R.(2d) 185; 538 W.A.C. 185; 2012 MBCA 13, refd to. [para. 65]. Pense v. Northern Life Assurance Co. (1907), 15 O.L.R. 131 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 68]. Dell Computer Corp. v. Union des consommateurs et al., [2007] 2 S.C.R. 801; 366 N.R. 1; 2007 SCC 34, refd to. [para. 99]. St. Pierre v. Chriscan Enterprises Ltd. et al. (2011), 302 B.C.A.C. 62; 511 W.A.C. 62; 2011 BCCA 97, refd to. [para. 99]. Manitoba v. Russell Inns Ltd. et al. (2013), 291 Man.R.(2d) 244; 570 W.A.C. 244; 2013 MBCA 46, refd to. [para. 99]. Statutes Noticed: Arbitration Act, C.C.S.M., c. A-120, sect. 6, sect. 7(1), sect. 7(2), sect. 7(6) [para. 17]. Authors and Works Noticed: Hall, Geoff R., Canadian Contractual Interpretation Law (2nd Ed. 2012), pp. 227, 228 [para. 59]. Hansard (Manitoba) - see Manitoba, Hansard, Legislative Assembly Debates and Proceedings. Manitoba Law Reform Commission, Arbitration (1994), Report No. 85, generally [para. 11]. Manitoba, Hansard, Legislative Assembly Debates and Proceedings (April 18, 1997), 36th Legislature, 3rd Sess, vol. XLVII, No. 29, pp. 1,647 [paras. 12, 14]; 1,648 [para. 14]. Counsel: A.E. Verhaeghe, for the appellant; G.G. Zazelenchuk, for the respondents. This appeal was heard on June 13, 2012, by Hamilton, Chartier, C.J.M., and Beard, JJ.A., of the Manitoba Court of Appeal. The following judgment of the Court of Appeal was delivered by Beard, J.A., on July 5, Editor: Anick Ouellette-Levesque Appeal allowed. Stay of proceedings - When available - The plaintiffs brought an action, alleging that, in violation of an implied term of an agreement between the parties, the materials used by
6 and the workmanship of the defendant in the construction of the plaintiffs' new home, were not such that the finished product was fit for the purpose intended - The defendant applied for a stay of proceedings on the ground that, under the agreement, the dispute should be referred to arbitration - The motion judge dismissed the application, finding that the arbitration clause did not have application by interpreting clauses 10.1 and 10.2 to apply only to disputes that arose during the course of construction, but not to disputes arising thereafter - The defendant appealed - The Manitoba Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and stayed the court proceedings under s. 7(1) of the Arbitration Act - While the motion judge applied the general principles of contractual interpretation, he did not consider or apply any of the principles related specifically to the interpretation of contractual arbitration clauses - The broader, more liberal, interpretation, and that which was equally, if not more, in keeping with the wording of clauses 10.1 and 10.2, would be to read the two clauses as separate provisions, rather than using the wording of clause 10.1 to limit the interpretation of clause As a result, he did not apply the correct legal principles - The failure to apply the correct legal principles was a question of law and was reviewable on a standard of correctness - The motion judge erred in law in his interpretation of the arbitration clauses of the Agreement by failing to consider the correct principles of contractual interpretation as they relate to the interpretation of the arbitration provisions of the Agreement - See paragraphs 68 to 84.
Indexed As: Murphy v. Amway Canada et al. Federal Court of Appeal Nadon, Gauthier and Trudel, JJ.A. February 14, 2013.
Kerry Murphy (appellant) v. Amway Canada Corporation and Amway Global (respondents) (A-487-11; 2013 FCA 38) Indexed As: Murphy v. Amway Canada et al. Federal Court of Appeal Nadon, Gauthier and Trudel,
More informationProceeding under the Class Proceedings Act, Proceeding under the Class Proceedings Act, 1992
Proceeding under the Class Proceedings Act, 1992 Dianna Louise Parsons, Michael Herbert Cruickshanks, David Tull, Martin Henry Griffen, Anna Kardish, Elsie Kotyk, Executrix of the Estate of Harry Kotyk,
More informationIndexed As: Ouellette v. Saint-André (Rural Community) New Brunswick Court of Appeal Larlee, Richard and Bell, JJ.A. March 14, 2013.
Gisèle Ouellette (applicant/appellant) v. Saint-André, an incorporated Rural Community (respondent) (89-12-CA; 2013 NBCA 21) Indexed As: Ouellette v. Saint-André (Rural Community) New Brunswick Court of
More informationCindy Fulawka (plaintiff/respondent) v. The Bank of Nova Scotia (defendant/appellant) (C54467; 2012 ONCA 443)
Cindy Fulawka (plaintiff/respondent) v. The Bank of Nova Scotia (defendant/appellant) (C54467; 2012 ONCA 443) Indexed As: Fulawka v. Bank of Nova Scotia Ontario Court of Appeal Winkler, C.J.O., Lang and
More informationIndexed As: Figueiras v. York (Regional Municipality) et al. Ontario Court of Appeal Rouleau, van Rensburg and Pardu, JJ.A. March 30, 2015.
Paul Figueiras (applicant/appellant) v. Toronto Police Services Board, Regional Municipality of York Police Services Board, and Mark Charlebois (respondents/respondents) (C58771; 2015 ONCA 208) Indexed
More informationIndexed As: Halifax (Regional Municipality) v. Human Rights Commission (N.S.) et al.
Halifax Regional Municipality, a body corporate duly incorporated pursuant to the laws of Nova Scotia (appellant) v. Nova Scotia Human Rights Commission, Lucien Comeau, Lynn Connors and Her Majesty the
More informationIndexed As: Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce et al. v. Deloitte & Touche et al.
Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, High River Limited Partnership, Philip Services Corp. by its receiver and manager, Robert Cumming (plaintiffs/appellants) v. Deloitte & Touche, Deloitte & Touche LLP,
More informationHer Majesty the Queen (applicant/appellant) v. Richard Gill (respondent/respondent) (C53886; 2012 ONCA 607) Indexed As: R. v. Gill (R.
Her Majesty the Queen (applicant/appellant) v. Richard Gill (respondent/respondent) (C53886; 2012 ONCA 607) Indexed As: R. v. Gill (R.) Ontario Court of Appeal Doherty, Lang and Epstein, JJ.A. September
More informationKeith Pridgen and Steven Pridgen (applicants) v. The University of Calgary (respondent) ( ; 2010 ABQB 644)
In The Matter Of Keith Pridgen and Steven Pridgen on Findings of Non-Academic Misconduct on Appeal from the Ad Hoc Review Committee of the General Faculties Council Keith Pridgen and Steven Pridgen (applicants)
More informationHer Majesty The Queen (respondent) v. Z. (A.A.) (young person/accused/appellant) (AY ; 2013 MBCA 33) Indexed As: R. v. A.A.Z.
Her Majesty The Queen (respondent) v. Z. (A.A.) (young person/accused/appellant) (AY 11-30-07655; 2013 MBCA 33) Indexed As: R. v. A.A.Z. Manitoba Court of Appeal Scott, C.J.M., Hamilton and Beard, JJ.A.
More informationHer Majesty The Queen (appellant) v. William Imona Russel (accused) (C51166)
Her Majesty The Queen (appellant) v. William Imona Russel (accused) (C51166) Her Majesty The Queen (appellant) v. William Imona Russel (accused) (C51877) Her Majesty The Queen (appellant) v. Paul Whalen
More informationHer Majesty the Queen (appellant) v. Ronald Jones (respondent) (C52480; 2011 ONCA 632) Indexed As: R. v. Jones (R.)
Her Majesty the Queen (appellant) v. Ronald Jones (respondent) (C52480; 2011 ONCA 632) Indexed As: R. v. Jones (R.) Ontario Court of Appeal MacPherson, Blair and Epstein, JJ.A. October 11, 2011. Summary:
More informationIndexed As: Mounted Police Association of Ontario et al. v. Canada (Attorney General)
Mounted Police Association of Ontario/Association de la Police Montée de l'ontario and B.C. Mounted Police Professional Association on their own behalf and on behalf of all members of the Royal Canadian
More informationRegina (respondent) v. Rajan Singh Mann (appellant) and British Columbia Civil Liberties Association (intervenor) (CA040090; 2014 BCCA 231)
Regina (respondent) v. Rajan Singh Mann (appellant) and British Columbia Civil Liberties Association (intervenor) (CA040090; 2014 BCCA 231) Indexed As: R. v. Mann (R.S.) British Columbia Court of Appeal
More informationHer Majesty the Queen (respondent) v. Sheldon Stubbs (appellant) (C51351; 2013 ONCA 514) Indexed As: R. v. Stubbs (S.)
Her Majesty the Queen (respondent) v. Sheldon Stubbs (appellant) (C51351; 2013 ONCA 514) Indexed As: R. v. Stubbs (S.) Ontario Court of Appeal Sharpe, Gillese and Watt, JJ.A. August 12, 2013. Summary:
More informationSa Majesté la Reine (appelante) v. Adjudant J.G.A. Gagnon (intimé)
Sa Majesté la Reine (appelante) v. Adjudant J.G.A. Gagnon (intimé) Sa Majesté la Reine (appelante) v. Caporal A.J.R. Thibault (intimé) (CMAC-577; CMAC-581; 2015 CMAC 2; 2015 CACM 2) Indexed As: R. v. Gagnon
More informationIndexed As: Royal Bank of Canada v. Trang. Ontario Court of Appeal Hoy, A.C.J.O., Laskin, Sharpe, Cronk and Blair, JJ.A. December 9, 2014.
Royal Bank of Canada (plaintiff/appellant) v. Phat Trang and Phuong Trang a.k.a. Phuong Thi Trang (defendants) and Bank of Nova Scotia (respondent) (C57306; 2014 ONCA 883) Indexed As: Royal Bank of Canada
More informationThe Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness (appellant) v. Thanh Tam Tran (respondent) (A ; 2015 FCA 237)
The Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness (appellant) v. Thanh Tam Tran (respondent) (A-531-14; 2015 FCA 237) Indexed As: Tran v. Canada (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness)
More informationHer Majesty the Queen (respondent) v. Ghassan Salah (appellant) (C46991)
Her Majesty the Queen (respondent) v. Ghassan Salah (appellant) (C46991) Her Majesty the Queen (respondent) v. Randy William Parish (appellant) (C47004) Her Majesty the Queen (respondent) v. Thomas J.
More informationIndexed As: Canadian National Railway v. Seeley et al. Federal Court Mandamin, J. February 1, 2013.
Canadian National Railway (applicant) v. Denise Seeley and Canadian Human Rights Commission (respondents) and Ontario Human Rights Commission, Federally Regulated Employers - Transportation and Communication
More informationIBM Canada Limited (appellant) v. Richard Waterman (respondent) (34472; 2013 SCC 70; 2013 CSC 70) Indexed As: Waterman v. IBM Canada Ltd.
IBM Canada Limited (appellant) v. Richard Waterman (respondent) (34472; 2013 SCC 70; 2013 CSC 70) Indexed As: Waterman v. IBM Canada Ltd. Supreme Court of Canada McLachlin, C.J.C., LeBel, Fish, Abella,
More informationIndexed As: Iyamuremye et al. v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) Federal Court Shore, J. May 26, 2014.
Oscar Iyamuremye, Jean de Dieu Ntibeshya, Jeanine Umuhire et Karabo Greta Ineza (partie demanderesse) v. Le Ministre de la Citoyenneté et de l'immigration (partie défenderesse) (IMM-5282-13; 2014 CF 494;
More informationHer Majesty the Queen v. Augustus Roderick Hancock (2015 NLPC 1313A00983) Indexed As: R. v. Hancock (A.R.)
Her Majesty the Queen v. Augustus Roderick Hancock (2015 NLPC 1313A00983) Indexed As: R. v. Hancock (A.R.) Newfoundland and Labrador Provincial Court Gorman, P.C.J. March 2, 2015. Summary: The accused
More informationHer Majesty The Queen (appellant) v. Robert Sarrazin and Darlind Jean (respondents) (33917; 2011 SCC 54; 2011 CSC 54)
Her Majesty The Queen (appellant) v. Robert Sarrazin and Darlind Jean (respondents) (33917; 2011 SCC 54; 2011 CSC 54) Indexed As: R. v. Sarrazin (R.) et al. Supreme Court of Canada McLachlin, C.J.C., Binnie,
More informationIndexed As: R. v. J.F. Supreme Court of Canada McLachlin, C.J.C., LeBel, Fish, Rothstein, Cromwell, Moldaver and Karakatsanis, JJ. March 1, 2013.
J.F. (appellant) v. Her Majesty The Queen (respondent) and British Columbia Civil Liberties Association (intervenor) (34284; 2013 SCC 12; 2013 CSC 12) Indexed As: R. v. J.F. Supreme Court of Canada McLachlin,
More informationIndexed As: Boucher v. Wal-Mart Canada Corp. et al. Ontario Court of Appeal Hoy, A.C.J.O., Laskin and Tulloch, JJ.A. May 22, 2014.
Meredith Boucher (plaintiff/respondent) v. Wal-Mart Canada Corp. and Jason Pinnock (defendants/appellants) (C56243; C56262; 2014 ONCA 419) Indexed As: Boucher v. Wal-Mart Canada Corp. et al. Ontario Court
More informationIndexed As: Kandola v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) Federal Court of Appeal Noël, Mainville and Webb, JJ.A. March 31, 2014.
The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (appellant) v. Nanakmeet Kaur Kandola by her guardian at law Malkiat Singh Kandola (respondent) (A-154-13; 2014 FCA 85) Indexed As: Kandola v. Canada (Minister
More informationIndexed As: Thibodeau v. Air Canada. Federal Court of Appeal Pelletier, Gauthier and Trudel, JJ.A. September 25, 2012.
Air Canada (appellant) v. Michel Thibodeau and Lynda Thibodeau (respondents) and The Commissioner of Official Languages (intervener) (A-358-11; 2012 FCA 246; 2012 CAF 246) Indexed As: Thibodeau v. Air
More informationA.M.R.I. (applicant/respondent on appeal) v. K.E.R. (respondent/appellant on appeal) (C52822; 2011 ONCA 417) Indexed As: A.M.R.I. v. K.E.R.
A.M.R.I. (applicant/respondent on appeal) v. K.E.R. (respondent/appellant on appeal) (C52822; 2011 ONCA 417) Indexed As: A.M.R.I. v. K.E.R. Ontario Court of Appeal Cronk, Gillese and MacFarland, JJ.A.
More informationIndexed As: McLean v. British Columbia Securities Commission
Patricia McLean (appellant) v. Executive Director of the British Columbia Securities Commission (respondent) and Financial Advisors Association of Canada and Ontario Securities Commission (interveners)
More informationIndexed As: R. v. Spencer (M.D.)
Matthew David Spencer (appellant) v. Her Majesty the Queen (respondent) and Director of Public Prosecutions, Attorney General of Ontario, Attorney General of Alberta, Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Canadian
More informationHer Majesty The Queen v. Clifford Dale Lawler (accused) (2011 MBPC 53) Indexed As: R. v. Lawler (C.D.)
Her Majesty The Queen v. Clifford Dale Lawler (accused) (2011 MBPC 53) Indexed As: R. v. Lawler (C.D.) Manitoba Provincial Court Winnipeg Centre Smith, P.C.J. July 12, 2011. Summary: The accused was injured
More informationIndexed As: Downtown Eastside Sex Workers United Against Violence Society et al. v. Canada (Attorney General)
Attorney General of Canada (appellant) v. Downtown Eastside Sex Workers United Against Violence Society and Sheryl Kiselbach (respondents) and Attorney General of Ontario, Community Legal Assistance Society,
More informationAnd In The Matter of [...] Indexed As: Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act, Re. Federal Court Mactavish, J. December 6, 2012.
In The Matter of an Application by [...] for Warrants Pursuant to Sections 16 and 21 of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act, R.S.C. 1985, C. C-23 (2012 FC 1437) And In The Matter of [...] Indexed
More informationIndexed As: British Columbia Teachers' Federation v. British Columbia Public School Employers' Association
British Columbia Teachers' Federation (appellant/union) v. British Columbia Public School Employers' Association (respondent/employer) (CA039123; 2012 BCCA 326) Indexed As: British Columbia Teachers' Federation
More informationIndexed As: Halifax (Regional Municipality) Pension Committee v. State Street Bank and Trust Co. et al.
The Halifax Regional Municipality Pension Committee (plaintiff) v. State Street Bank and Trust Company and State Street Global Advisors Ltd./Conseillers en Gestion State Street Ltée (defendants) (Hfx.
More informationA.I. Enterprises Ltd. and Alan Schelew (appellants) v. Bram Enterprises Ltd. and Jamb Enterprises Ltd. (respondents) ( CA; 2012 NBCA 33)
A.I. Enterprises Ltd. and Alan Schelew (appellants) v. Bram Enterprises Ltd. and Jamb Enterprises Ltd. (respondents) (108-10-CA; 2012 NBCA 33) Indexed As: Bram Enterprises Ltd. et al. v. A.I. Enterprises
More informationHer Majesty the Queen (appellant) v. Hussein Jama Nur (respondent)
Her Majesty the Queen (appellant) v. Hussein Jama Nur (respondent) Attorney General of Canada (appellant) v. Hussein Jama Nur (respondent) and Attorney General of Quebec, Attorney General of British Columbia,
More informationIndexed As: Moore v. Getahun et al. Ontario Court of Appeal Laskin, Sharpe and Simmons, JJ.A. January 29, 2015.
Blake Moore (respondent) v. Dr. Tajedin Getahun, The Scarborough Hospital - General Division, Dr. John Doe and Jack Doe (appellant) (C58338; 2015 ONCA 55) Indexed As: Moore v. Getahun et al. Ontario Court
More informationIndexed As: Canadian Human Rights Commission v. Canada (Attorney General) et al. Federal Court Mactavish, J. April 18, 2012.
Canadian Human Rights Commission (applicant) v. Attorney General of Canada, First Nations Child and Family Caring Society, Assembly of First Nations, Chiefs of Ontario, Amnesty International (respondents)
More informationSUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Wamboldt Estate v. Wamboldt, 2017 NSSC 288
SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Wamboldt Estate v. Wamboldt, 2017 NSSC 288 Date: 20171107 Docket: Bwt No. 459126 Registry: Bridgewater Between: Michael Dockrill, in his capacity as the executor
More informationIndexed As: Mavi et al. v. Canada (Attorney General) et al.
Attorney General of Canada (appellant) v. Pritpal Singh Mavi, Maria Cristina Jatuff de Altamirano, Nedzad Dzihic, Rania El-Murr, Oleg Grankin, Raymond Hince, Homa Vossoughi and Hamid Zebaradami (respondents)
More informationEmilian Peter (applicant) v. The Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness (respondent) (IMM ; 2014 FC 1073)
Emilian Peter (applicant) v. The Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness (respondent) (IMM-12508-12; 2014 FC 1073) Indexed As: Peter v. Canada (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness)
More informationIndexed As: William v. British Columbia et al. British Columbia Court of Appeal Levine, Tysoe and Groberman, JJ.A. June 27, 2012.
Roger William, on his own behalf and on behalf of all other members of the Xeni Gwet'in First Nations Government and on behalf of all other members of the Tsilhqot'in Nation (respondent/plaintiff) v. Her
More informationSeong Yun Ko (respondent/plaintiff) v. Hillview Homes Ltd. (appellant/defendant) ( AC; 2012 ABCA 245) Indexed As: Ko v. Hillview Homes Ltd.
Seong Yun Ko (respondent/plaintiff) v. Hillview Homes Ltd. (appellant/defendant) (0803-0212-AC; 2012 ABCA 245) Indexed As: Ko v. Hillview Homes Ltd. Alberta Court of Appeal Côté, Rowbotham and McDonald,
More informationSUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE DIVISIONAL COURT. SWINTON, THORBURN, and COPELAND JJ. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
CITATION: Movati Athletic (Group Inc. v. Bergeron, 2018 ONSC 7258 DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: DC-18-2411 DATE: 20181206 ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE DIVISIONAL COURT SWINTON, THORBURN, and COPELAND
More informationIndexed As: Bank of Montreal v. Rogozinsky. Alberta Court of Queen's Bench Judicial District of Edmonton Schlosser, Master December 16, 2014.
Bank of Montreal (plaintiff and defendant by counterclaim) v. Aileen J. Rogozinsky also known as Aileen Janet Rogozinsky (defendant and plaintiff by counterclaim) (1403 09800; 2014 ABQB 771) Indexed As:
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 informationIndexed As: Sun-Rype Products Ltd. et al. v. Archer Daniels Midland Co. et al.
Sun-Rype Products Ltd. and Wendy Weberg (appellants/respondents on cross-appeal) v. Archer Daniels Midland Company, Cargill, Incorporated, Cerestar USA, Inc., formerly known as American Maize-Products
More informationRichard James Goodwin (appellant) v. British Columbia (Superintendent of Motor Vehicles) and Attorney General of British Columbia (respondents)
Richard James Goodwin (appellant) v. British Columbia (Superintendent of Motor Vehicles) and Attorney General of British Columbia (respondents) British Columbia (Superintendent of Motor Vehicles) and Attorney
More informationSUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: O Regan Properties Limited v. Business Development Bank of Canada, 2018 NSSC 193. O Regan Properties Limited
SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: O Regan Properties Limited v. Business Development Bank of Canada, 2018 NSSC 193 Between: O Regan Properties Limited Date: 2018 08 21 Docket: Hfx No. 463257 Registry:
More informationMr. Justice Marc M. Monnin Mr. Justice Christopher J. Mainella Madam Justice Jennifer A. Pfuetzner
Citation: Northern Regional Health Authority v Manitoba Human Rights Commission et al, 2017 MBCA 98 Date: 20171005 Docket: AI16-30-08687 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MANITOBA Coram: Mr. Justice Marc M. Monnin
More information394 Lakeshore Oakville Holdings Inc. (plaintiffs/respondent) v. Carol Anne Misek and Janet Purvis (defendants/appellant) (C53035)
Combined Air Mechanical Services Inc., Dravo Manufacturing Inc. and Combined Air Mechanical Services (plaintiffs/appellants) v. William Flesch, WJF Investments Inc., Service Sheet Metal Inc. and James
More informationPRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW SUMMARY 2011
PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW SUMMARY 2011 LAWSKOOL CANADA CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION TO PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW... 5 1.1 WHAT IS PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW?... 5 1.2 TERRITORIAL DIMENSIONS OF PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MANITOBA
Citation: Virden Mainline Motor Products Limited v Date: 20180831 Murray et al, 2018 MBCA 82 Docket: AI17-30-08963 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MANITOBA Coram: Mr. Justice Michel A. Monnin Madam Justice Freda
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MANITOBA
Citation: Dorn v Association of Professional Engineers Date: 20180305 and Geoscientists of the Province of Manitoba, Docket: AI17-30-08819 2018 MBCA 18 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MANITOBA Coram: Mr. Justice
More informationCOURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH OF MANITOBA
Origin: Appeal from a decision of the Master of the Court of Queen's Bench, dated June 5, 2013 Date: 20131213 Docket: CI 13-01-81367 (Winnipeg Centre) Indexed as: Jewish Community Campus of Winnipeg Inc.
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MANITOBA
Citation: Stadler v Director, St Boniface/ Date: 20181010 St Vital, 2018 MBCA 103 Docket: AI18-30-09081 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MANITOBA B ETWEEN : K. A. Burwash for the Applicant A. J. Ladyka MARTIN
More informationR. v. H. (S.) Defences Automatism Insane and non-insane
88 [Indexed as: R. v. H. (S.)] Her Majesty the Queen, Appellant and S.H., Respondent Ontario Court of Appeal Docket: CA C56874 2014 ONCA 303 Robert J. Sharpe, David Watt, M.L. Benotto JJ.A. Heard: January
More informationIndexed As: Workers' Compensation Board (B.C.) v. Human Rights Tribunal (B.C.) et al.
Workers' Compensation Board of British Columbia (appellant) v. Guiseppe Figliola, Kimberley Sallis, Barry Dearden and British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal (respondents) and Attorney General of British
More informationIndexed As: Dow Chemical Co. et al. v. Nova Chemicals Corp. Federal Court O'Keefe, J. September 5, 2014.
The Dow Chemical Company, Dow Global Technologies Inc. and Dow Chemical Canada ULC (plaintiffs) v. Nova Chemicals Corporation (defendant) (T-2051-10; 2014 FC 844) Indexed As: Dow Chemical Co. et al. v.
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MANITOBA
Citation: City of Winnipeg v Innocent Vision Inc, Date: 20180813 2018 MBCA 76 Docket: AR18-30-09058 B ETWEEN : IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MANITOBA ) R. M. McElhoes CITY OF WINNIPEG ) for the Applicant )
More informationIndexed As: Pro-Sys Consultants Ltd. et al. v. Microsoft Corp. et al.
Pro-Sys Consultants Ltd. and Neil Godfrey (appellants) v. Microsoft Corporation and Microsoft Canada Co./Microsoft Canada CIE (respondents) and Attorney General of Canada (intervener) (34282; 2013 SCC
More informationNOVA SCOTIA COURT OF APPEAL Citation: R. v. Hatt, 2017 NSCA 36. Her Majesty the Queen
NOVA SCOTIA COURT OF APPEAL Citation: R. v. Hatt, 2017 NSCA 36 Date: 20170509 Docket: CAC 457828 Registry: Halifax Between: Richard Edward Hatt v. Her Majesty the Queen Appellant Respondent Judge: Appeal
More informationRecent Developments in the Canadian Law of Contract
Honest Performance and Absolutely Everything Else By Ryan P. Krushelnitzky and Sandra L. Corbett QC Recent Developments in the Canadian Law of Contract Bhasin and Sattva represent important changes and
More informationCOURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO
BETWEEN COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO CITATION: Trillium Motor World Ltd. v. General Motors of Canada Limited, 2017 ONCA 545 DATE: 20170704 DOCKET: C60838 Cronk, van Rensburg and Pardu JJ.A. Trillium Motor
More informationIs Canada ready for class arbitration?
dentons.com Is Canada ready for class arbitration? A Discussion about the Implications of the Ontario Court of Appeal decision in Wellman v. TELUS Communications Company* By Michael Schafler and Barbara
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MANITOBA
Citation: MNP Ltd v Desrochers, 2018 MBCA 97 Date: 20181001 Docket: AI17-30-08933 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MANITOBA Coram: Mr. Justice Marc M. Monnin Mr. Justice Christopher J. Mainella Madam Justice
More informationCOURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO
COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO CITATION: Maple Ridge Community Management Ltd. v. Peel Condominium Corporation No. 231, 2015 ONCA 520 DATE: 20150709 DOCKET: C59661 BETWEEN Laskin, Lauwers and Hourigan JJ.A.
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MANITOBA
Citation: Brar v Brar et al, 2018 MBCA 87 Date: 20180912 Docket: AI17-30-08903 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MANITOBA Coram: Madam Justice Freda M. Steel Mr. Justice Christopher J. Mainella Madam Justice Jennifer
More informationCOURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO
COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO CITATION: 1318847 Ontario Limited v. Laval Tool & Mould Ltd., 2017 ONCA 184 DATE: 20170303 DOCKET: C61886 BETWEEN James K. Ball, for the appellant Strathy C.J.O., LaForme and
More informationCase Name: Cuddy Chicks Ltd. v. Ontario (Labour Relations Board)
Page 1 Case Name: Cuddy Chicks Ltd. v. Ontario (Labour Relations Board) Cuddy Chicks Limited, appellant; v. Ontario Labour Relations Board and United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Local
More informationThe Continuing Legal Education Society of Nova Scotia
The Continuing Legal Education Society of Nova Scotia A Review of Pre-Judgement Interest Raymond F. Wagner. The Law Practice of Wagner & Associates -------- Suite 1110-1660 Hollis Street, Halifax, Nova
More informationNOVA SCOTIA COURT OF APPEAL Citation: R. v. Spencer, 2015 NSCA 108. Debra Jane Spencer. v. Her Majesty The Queen
NOVA SCOTIA COURT OF APPEAL Citation: R. v. Spencer, 2015 NSCA 108 Date: 20151202 Docket: CAC 444045 Registry: Halifax Between: Judge: Motion Heard: Debra Jane Spencer v. Her Majesty The Queen MacDonald,
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 informationSUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Hyson v. Nova Scotia (Public Service LTD), 2016 NSSC 153
SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Hyson v. Nova Scotia (Public Service LTD), 2016 NSSC 153 Date: 2016-06-16 Docket: Hfx No. 447446 Registry: Halifax Between: Annette Louise Hyson Applicant v. Nova
More informationIndexed As: Lockridge et al. v. Ontario (Minister of Environment) et al.
Ada Lockridge and Ronald Plain (applicants) v. Director, Ministry of the Environment, Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario, as Represented by the Minister of the Environment, the Attorney General
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MANITOBA
Citation: Anderson et al v Manitoba et al, 2015 MBCA 123 Date: 20151231 Docket: AI15-30-08332 B E T W E E N : IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MANITOBA CLIFFORD J. ANDERSON, KURVIS ) M. J. Peerless and ANDERSON,
More informationCOURT OF QUEEN S BENCH OF MANITOBA
Summary conviction appeal from a Judicial Justice of the Peace and Provincial Court Judge Date: 20181031 Docket: CR 17-01-36275 (Winnipeg Centre) Indexed as: R. v. Grant Cited as: 2018 MBQB 171 COURT OF
More informationBuying or Selling a Business
TAB 2 Buying or Selling a Business Restrictive Covenants in Commercial and Employment Contexts: Key Cases and Considerations Adrian Ishak, Rubin Thomlinson LLP Parisa Nikfarjam, Rubin Thomlinson LLP March
More informationHALEY WHITTERS and JULIE HENDERSON
CITATION: Whitters v. Furtive Networks Inc., 2012 ONSC 2159 COURT FILE NO.: CV-11-420068 DATE: 20120405 SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO RE: HALEY WHITTERS and JULIE HENDERSON - and - FURTIVE NETWORKS
More informationCAPACITY CHECKLIST: THE ESTATE PLANNING CONTEXT
CAPACITY CAPACITY CHECKLIST: THE ESTATE PLANNING CONTEXT Capacity is decision-specific, time-specific and situation-specific in every instance, in that legal capacity can fluctuate. There is a legal presumption
More informationHEARD: November 14, 2014, December 17, 2014, February 6, 2015 ENDORSEMENT
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO CITATION: Markoulakis v. SNC-Lavalin Inc., 2015 ONSC 1081 COURT FILE NO.: CV-14-504720 DATE: 20150416 RE: Eftihios (Ed) Markoulakis, Plaintiff, AND: SNC-Lavalin Inc.,
More informationIN THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Cite as: Custom Clean Atlantic Ltd. v. GSF Canada Inc., 2016 NSSM 17 PRELIMINARY RULING ON JURISDICTION
Claim No. SCCH-449291 IN THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Cite as: Custom Clean Atlantic Ltd. v. GSF Canada Inc., 2016 NSSM 17 BETWEEN: CUSTOM CLEAN ATLANTIC LTD. Claimant - and - GSF CANADA INC.
More informationANNUAL REVIEW OF CIVIL LITIGATION
ANNUAL REVIEW OF CIVIL LITIGATION 2017 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE TODD L. ARCHIBALD SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE (ONTARIO) # 2017 Thomson Reuters Canada NOTICE AND DISCLAIMER: All rights reserved. No part
More informationSUPREME COURT OF CANADA
SUPREME COURT OF CANADA CITATION: Halifax (Regional Municipality) v. Nova Scotia (Human Rights Commission), 2012 SCC 10 DATE: 20120316 DOCKET: 33651 BETWEEN: Halifax Regional Municipality, a body corporate
More informationRECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN THE LAW OF STAY OF PROCEEDINGS. Brandon Jaffe Jaffe & Peritz LLP
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN THE LAW OF STAY OF PROCEEDINGS Brandon Jaffe Jaffe & Peritz LLP 1 SECTION 69 OF THE BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY ACT ( BIA ) 2 LEGISLATIVE HISTORY OF THE BIA STAY PROVISIONS 1 Since
More informationIndexed As: Infineon Technologies AG et al. v. Option consommateurs et al.
Infineon Technologies AG and Infineon Technologies North America Corp. (appellants) v. Option consommateurs and Claudette Cloutier (respondents) and Canadian Federation of Independent Grocers (intervener)
More informationSUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Fawson Estate v. Deveau, 2015 NSSC 355
SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Fawson Estate v. Deveau, 2015 NSSC 355 Date: 20150917 Docket: Hfx No. 412751 Registry: Halifax Between: James Robert Fawson, James Robert Fawson, as the personal
More informationAN OVERVIEW OF EXTRAORDINARY REMEDIES
EXTRAORDINARY REMEDIES IN CIVIL LITIGATION 2 EXTRAORDINARY REMEDIES Extraordinary remedies available in civil proceedings include: Prohibitive, Mandatory and Preventative Injunctions Preservation of and
More informationCourt Appealed From: Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador Trial Division (G) G1143 (2014 NLTD(G) 131)
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR COURT OF APPEAL Citation: Tuck v. Supreme Holdings, 2016 NLCA 40 Date: August 4, 2016 Docket: 14/96 BETWEEN: TANYA TUCK APPELLANT AND: SUPREME HOLDINGS
More informationIndexed As: Reference Re Securities Act
In The Matter Of a Reference by the Governor in Council concerning the proposed Canadian Securities Act, as set out in Order in Council P.C. 2010-667, dated May 26, 2010 (33718; 2011 SCC 66; 2011 CSC 66)
More informationLarry Nicholas Estabrooks, Director of Consumer Affairs,
Citation : Estabrooks v. New Brunswick (Director of Consumer Affairs), 2016 NBFCST 11 PROVINCE OF NEW BRUNSWICK FINANCIAL AND CONSUMER SERVICES TRIBUNAL IN THE MATTER OF THE REAL ESTATE AGENTS ACT, S.N.B.
More informationCOURT OF QUEEN S BENCH OF MANITOBA
On appeal from the decision of the Registrar of the Court of Queen s Bench dated October 13, 2017 Date: 20180411 Docket: BK 16-01-04099 (Winnipeg Centre) Indexed as: Toyota Credit Canada Inc. v. MNP Ltd.
More informationCOURT OF APPEAL FOR BRITISH COLUMBIA
COURT OF APPEAL FOR BRITISH COLUMBIA Citation: Between: And Before: Chalmers v. AMO Canada Company, 2010 BCCA 560 Trina Lorraine Chalmers, an infant, by her litigation guardian, Cherie Chalmers AMO Canada
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Citation: Between: And A & G Investment Inc. v. 0915630 B.C. Ltd., 2013 BCSC 1784 A & G Investment Inc. 0915630 B.C. Ltd. Date: 20130927 Docket: S132980 Registry:
More informationNOVA SCOTIA COURT OF APPEAL Citation: R. v. George, 2016 NSCA 88. Steven William George
NOVA SCOTIA COURT OF APPEAL Citation: R. v. George, 2016 NSCA 88 Date: 20161209 Docket: CAC 449452 Registry: Halifax Between: Her Majesty the Queen v. Steven William George Appellant Respondent Judge:
More informationReading and Understanding Case Reports: A Guide for Self-Represented Litigants. Margarita Dvorkina & Julie Macfarlane
Reading and Understanding Case Reports: A Guide for Self-Represented Litigants Margarita Dvorkina & Julie Macfarlane The National Self-Represented Litigants Project September 2017 Table of Contents Before
More informationArbitration Clauses in Employment Contracts
EMPLOYMENT LAW CONFERENCE 2013 PAPER 2.1 Arbitration Clauses in Employment Contracts These materials were prepared by Jennifer D. Wiegele of Kent Employment Law, Vancouver, BC, for the Continuing Legal
More informationIs there really any question about the test for part performance in Alberta? by Jonnette Watson Hamilton
Is there really any question about the test for part performance in Alberta? by Jonnette Watson Hamilton G 400 Holdings Ltd. v. Yeoman Development Company Limited, 2008 ABQB 667 http://www.albertacourts.ab.ca/jdb%5c2003-%5cqb%5ccivil%5c2008%5c2008abqb0667.pdf
More information