Sentences with phrase «railway company v.»

On May 2, 2014, the Federal Court of Appeal released its long - awaited decisions in Canada (Attorney General) v. Johnstone, 2014 FCA 110 (CanLII) and Canadian National Railway Company v. Seeley, 2014 FCA 111 (CanLII).

A step in the proceeding is a formal step that moves the action forward: Canadian National Railway Company v. Chiu, 2014 BCSC 75 at para. 7.

In 2014 and 2015, two federal court of appeal decisions (Canada (Attorney General) v. Johnstone and Canadian National Railway Company v. Seeley) and one Ontario Court of Appeal decision (Partridge v. Botony Dental Corporation) set out and applied a four - part test employees must meet to succeed in a family status discrimination claim in the context of childcare:

«It is particularly encouraging that the court is strongly unified in these important decisions,» Joyce said, referring to another 8 - 1 decision in BNSF Railway Company v. Tyrell and a unanimous 8 - 0 decision in TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, both announced last month.

Grauer J. cited the Ontario Superior Court decision in Canadian National Railway Company v. Google Inc. to support the proposition that a higher hurdle would normally be needed than the normal three - part test in R.J.R. McDonald Inc. v. Canada Attorney, where a plaintiff must simply show there is a serious case to be tried.

In Attorney General of Canada v. Fiona - Ann Johnstone and Canadian Human Rights Commission, [2014] FCA 110 and Canadian National Railway Company v. Denise Seeley and Canadian Human Rights Commission [2014] FCA 111, the FCA determined that the term family status does not extend to elective family requests that are a preference and only need be accorded to those that are a substantial obligation.

Not exact matches

He has for example acted in long - running litigation arising out of the privatisation of the railways of Kenya and Uganda, represented a European state in a dispute in relation to satellite surveillance services, a German bank in its claims arising out of a major fraud to sell non-existent tickets to the Beijing Olympics, a state oil and gas company in relation to a subsea drilling project in the Caribbean, and for a large Russian bank in a major jurisdictional dispute (VTB v. Nutritek).

-- Sheltam Rail Company (Proprietary) Ltd v. Mirambo Holdings Ltd: Led by David Mildon Q.C. in long - running LCIA proceedings between members of the consortium who had won the tender to run the newly privatised railways of Kenya and Uganda.

Erik Bornmann had been a lobbyist working for U.S. railway company OmniTRAX Inc., according to a B.C. Supreme Court judgment in R. v. Basi in 2009.

Thus Hadley v. Baxendale is the leading case on limiting awards for breach of contract — it's now on its way to becoming the leading case for starting awards, but that's another sad and frustrating story — when the far better case, Horne v. Midland Railway Company (1873), L.R. 8 C.P. 131 (Ex.

The court placed considerable reliance on the analysis in McCracken v. Canadian National Railway Company.

The following BASF Sponsor Firms were included on American Lawyer's top ten list of «Biggest Defense Wins, 2011 - 2013»: Arnold & Porter was listed twice (Vannessa Ventures v. Venezuela and Electrabel v. Hungary); and Winston & Strawn (Jordan v. International Company for Railway Systems).

In Stallard v. Norfolk Southern Railway Company, 2017 Ad.

on Eighth Circuit Rejects Obesity as an Impairment Under the ADA: Morriss v. BNSF Railway Company

In Coll v. BNSF Railway Company, the Court agreed with the arguments made by the plaintiff that the testimony of an expert in floor safety would be relevant in the slip - and - fall accident lawsuit that they had filed.

McCracken v. Canadian National Railway Company, 2010 ONSC 6026 (Ont SCJ) is necessary reading for any member of the legal profession with any (relevant) involvement in class actions... [more]