Sentences with phrase «substantial connection does»

If one of the connections identified in rule 17.02 (excepting subrules (h) and (o)-RRB- is made out, the defendant bears the burden of showing that a real and substantial connection does not exist.

Not exact matches

Ultimately, Colonial Marines is redeemed by its connection to a beloved franchise, but anyone seeking more substantial gameplay would do better looking at one of the titles that honours the series» influence, if not the name.

penalizes the defendant for engaging in public participation «plaintiff» means a person who initiates or maintains a proceeding against a defendant; «proceeding» means any action, suit, matter, cause, counterclaim, appeal, or originating application that is brought in the Supreme Court or the Provincial Court, but does not include a prosecution for an offence or a crime; «public interest» means the whole of the subject matter invites public attention, or a matter in which the public has some substantial concern because it affects the welfare of citizens, or one to which considerable public notoriety or controversy has attached; «public participation» means communication or conduct aimed at influencing public opinion, or promoting further lawful action by the public or any government body, in relation to an issue of public interest; «Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP)» means a claim that arises from a form of expression or public participation, by the person against whom the claim is asserted that was made in connection with an official proceeding or about a matter of public interest; Purposes of this Act: 2 The purposes of this Act are to a) Establish a statutory right to public participation for every individual; b) Encourage individuals to express themselves on matters of public interest; c) Promote broad participation in debates on matters of public interest; d) Discourage the use of litigation as a means of unduly limiting expression on matters of public interest; and, e) Preserve the right of access to the courts for all proceedings and claims that are not brought or maintained for an improper purpose.

There are few defences beyond showing that the US court did not have a real and substantial connection with the case.

The Supreme Court of Canada has recently stated in Chevron Corp. v. Yaiguaje that a party seeking enforcement of a judgment in Ontario does not have to show a real and substantial connection between Ontario and the foreign judgment debtor.

Firstly, when considering the suitability of the proposed class under s. 5 (1) of the Class Proceedings Act, 1992, he found that Ontario did not have a sufficiently real and substantial connection to the underlying facts and class members in the proposed class action for the Ontario courts to properly take jurisdiction over the proceeding.

Ask yourself this question, but don't go to proximate cause (remoteness) doctrines because they're not about whether something is or is not a factual cause: are there circumstances in which a necessary connection is NOT a «substantial» connection?)

In subsequent reasons for judgement Cresswell v Cresswell 2017 BCSC 1183 a BC Court ordered a court action transferred to Alberta after finding that the plaintiff did not have standing to bring the action in BC as she was ordinarily resident in Alberta, did not have real or substantial connections to BC and that Alberta was the more appropriate forum for the court action..

The Court concluded that Ontario did not have a «real and substantial connection» to the claim.

Justice Perell cited three instances of when a foreign company might be a «responsible issuer» under Part XXIII.1: (1) Where the foreign corporation's securities trade in Ontario's secondary market; (2) Where the foreign corporation's securities trade on secondary markets in both Ontario and a foreign jurisdiction; and (3) Where the foreign corporation's securities do not trade in Ontario, but the corporation otherwise has a real and substantial connection to Ontario.

if the child doesn't live in Ontario, but is in the province, there is evidence available in Ontario about the best interests of the child, the child has a real and substantial connection to Ontario, and the court feels that it is appropriate to start the case in Ontario;

Just as Canadian courts do not take jurisdiction just because a plaintiff has issued a statement of claim in Ontario, naming an out - of - province defendant — there has to be a real and substantial connection or submission — so they shouldn't take jurisdiction to hear any petition for divorce just because they are asked to.

Not surprisingly, none of the cases that equate but - for with substantial connection mention the Clements definition of but - for in paragraph 8 (some, after Clements, still don't cite Clements, but just Resurfice) nor this statement in Athey, at para. 41.2: «Even if the accidents played a minor role, the defendant would be fully liable because the accidents were still a necessary contributing cause.»

The employment tribunal (ET) and the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) held that the ET did not have jurisdiction to consider an unfair dismissal claim because of the absence of a «substantial connection,» as set out by Lord Hoffmann in Daley v Serco Home Affairs Ltd and others [2010] All ER (D) 22 (Jan).

Making substantial personal connections and letting them know all the things you can do will keep you top of mind when it comes time to switch gears.

In Queensland, any group of Indigenous people may claim «claimable» land on the basis of traditional affiliation54 or historical association, 55 as well as economic or cultural viability.56 This acknowledges the greater impact of colonisation within these states, which saw substantial numbers of Indigenous people removed from their traditional lands to other regions under government powers to remove and confine Aboriginal people to any Aboriginal reserve.57 It also recognises that this removal did not sever the continuing connection of Indigenous peoples to the land, both their traditional country and reserves.