Sentences with phrase «canadian appellate court»

• Boliden Ltd. v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co.: In the first Canadian appellate court decision to interpret how a pollution exclusion in a D&O policy applied to a securities claim, the outcome surprised many and resulted in many insurers and policyholders re-examining their contractual wording.

In a case last year, a Canadian appellate court deferred to an interpretation of law offered in an affidavit.

In the recent landmark case of Jones v. Tsige, 2012 ONCA 32, the Ontario Court of Appeal became the first Canadian appellate court to unequivocally recognize the common law tort of invasion of privacy.

A Canadian appellate court ruled that the defendant, described as the victim's «on - again, off - again partner of seven years,» did not commit sexual assault, overturning his conviction.

As well, a citation of the extent to which foreign, comparative, and international law is cited with approval in Canadian appellate courts would be informative and helpful to legal scholars and legal researchers generally.

The decision engages with the jurisprudence emanating from other Canadian appellate courts, the U.K., and the U.S., regarding entitlement to such damages under survival of actions statutes.

The Supreme Court of Canada, and other Canadian appellate courts have since the 1970s held that covenants to insure, in leases or construction contracts, bar claims by covenantors for loss or damage to the subject property by perils to be insured against, due to the negligence of covenantees.

Canadian appellate courts usually deal with harmless error (usually an evidentiary ruling by a trial judge that, while mistaken, does not meet the standard of reversible error on appeal, or to warrant a new trial) in the context of criminal trials.

LEAF also undertakes legal action by intervening at the Canadian appellate courts on significant cases that will establish important principles of equality for women.

The decision strengthens Canadian appellate courts» approach to favouring the enforcement of arbitration agreements — as a strong pro-arbitration policy.

The «Kathy K» principle has been repeatedly applied by the Supreme Court of Canada and other Canadian appellate courts, most recently in Housen.

Not exact matches

«Once you get a decision like this, it's open season,» John Burns, the Canadian lawyer who represented the group at a Moscow appellate court, told The New York Times.

The appellate court thus reasoned that the Income Tax Act demanded the lower court to constrain its privilege analysis to Canadian law.

The resolution expresses the CBA's view that to achieve «a reconciliation of the prior occupation of Canada by Indigenous societies with the subsequent assertion of Crown sovereignty» as required by s. 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982, an effort must be made to appoint aboriginal judges to appellate level Canadian courts, including the Supreme Court of Canada.

According to yesterday's news (see here for an article from the National Post), the government of New Brunswick will be asking the Supreme Court of Canada to look into the status of its language laws as it appeals the decision of its appellate court upholding the decision of a provincial judge who excluded breath - sample evidence of a suspected impaired driver pursuant to s. 24 (2) of the Canadian Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms because his language rights had been violated (see R. v. Losier, 2011 NBCA 102 (CanLII)-Court of Canada to look into the status of its language laws as it appeals the decision of its appellate court upholding the decision of a provincial judge who excluded breath - sample evidence of a suspected impaired driver pursuant to s. 24 (2) of the Canadian Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms because his language rights had been violated (see R. v. Losier, 2011 NBCA 102 (CanLII)-court upholding the decision of a provincial judge who excluded breath - sample evidence of a suspected impaired driver pursuant to s. 24 (2) of the Canadian Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms because his language rights had been violated (see R. v. Losier, 2011 NBCA 102 (CanLII)-RRB-.

Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=753344 (in Currie, «an Ontario appellate court held that an Illinois settlement was not binding on absent Canadian class members, on the basis of inadequate notice»).

In no partiular order: last year's decisions of decisions of the SCC; some provincial appellate decisions; your collegues; the Supreme Court of Canada Law Review; the Advocates» Quarterly, the Canadian Business Law Journal; Carswells Annual Review of Civil Litigation, the past year's «new» material that professors at the University of Manitoba law school will be adding to the their courses for the 2011 - 12 school year; some CLE papers from people you have reason to trust, and prayer to the diety - equivalent of your choice.

I represent local, national and international clients and I have appeared at all trial and appellate levels in Ontario, as well as the Federal Court of Canada, Federal Court of Appeal and the Canadian International Trade Tribunal.

However, because it was decided by an appellate court, it is likely to influence decisions made under human rights legislation in all Canadian jurisdictions, particularly those involving employer drug use policies in safety sensitive workplaces.

It is the first appellate decision in Canada following a joint trial conducted by a Canadian Court with a foreign Court.

The other great source for new ideas and just monitoring important happenings is to trawl the web - sites of the major appellate courts (Canadian and US Supreme Courts, House of Lords and High Court of Australia are the places I go) and look through their lists of pending appeals and judgments rescourts (Canadian and US Supreme Courts, House of Lords and High Court of Australia are the places I go) and look through their lists of pending appeals and judgments resCourts, House of Lords and High Court of Australia are the places I go) and look through their lists of pending appeals and judgments reserved.

Varying quality notwithstanding, all Canadian provincial, territorial, superior and appellate courts have a web presence.

The claim that the existence of a but - for cause requires that there be a «substantial connection» between negligence and injury has been asserted by the courts (trial or appellate) of some of the other Canadian common law jurisdictions: Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario and Nova Scotia), although (seemingly) without equating «substantial connection» to «material contribution» or «materially contributes».

Canadian courts have consistently adopted a similarly deferential approach to the appellate review of factual findings, as illustrated most notably by the Supreme Court of Canada's judgment in Stein v.

Perhaps this means that what is needed is for some inventive counsel to convince an appellate court to misuse an SCC decision, as plaintiff's counsel did with Walker Estate in Resurfice; or, for a trial judge or appellate court to accept, as I point out in the paper, that the SCC jurisprudence requires the conclusion that, in Canadian negligence law, events may occur without having causes (and not just in Stoner, B.C.).