Not exact matches
On the
issue of how to support Canadian content when fewer Canadians are purchasing cable TV subscriptions, the government
tested four options to raise new money for Canadian content: making telecom companies divert some smartphone and Internet revenue; requiring «foreign companies like Netflix and iTunes» to devote a portion of revenues; giving consumers the option of making a voluntary $ 2
contribution on their telecom or Netflix bill; or making telecom companies add an app to every smartphone sold in Canada that would provide access to Canadian music, TV and film for between $ 5 and $ 15 a month or a flat charge of $ 3 on the sale of all smartphones.
The Supreme Court's summary of the
issues in the appeal suggests that that all the Court was asked to do is clarify the meaning of the Resurfice material
contribution test for proof of the causation requirements in causes of action in negligence and, then, determine the correct result in Clements based on that
test.
While looking at the
contribution that hospital staff may have made to a death or illness, I have been immensely concerned how often it is that notes, reports of
tests etc that might be critical in resolving
issues go missing.
We also haven't seen any cases where a judge said that he or she, before Resurfice, would have found the factual causation
issue in favour of the plaintiff using Athey material
contribution — finding factual causation on the balance of probability — but, as a result of Resurfice, is now required to use the but - for
test and, on the facts, must find the plaintiff failed to establish factual causation on the balance of probability.
In those jurisdictions where jury trials are still available in civil actions — both the
issue of whether the Resurfice material
contribution test is applicable and the
issue of whether the plaintiff has satisfied the requirements of the doctrine will have to be decided by a judge.