Sentences with phrase «substantial connection for»

Section 106 (3) defines substantial connection for purposes of BC assuming control over deciding the case:

Not exact matches

The prior three corporate convictions under the CFPOA have been achieved by the entering of guilty pleas.2 The Court also for the first time interpreted the meaning of key provisions in the statute, including clarifying that an inchoate offence of conspiracy exists under the CFPOA and in what circumstances a real and substantial connection will be required and found.

If you've had an Internet connection for any substantial amount of time, then it's likely you've seen the incredible live - performance video for Sonseed's «Jesus Is My Friend.»

It has taken more than big - name connections for Arista Industries to thrive for more than 80 years, and Weitzer says the company has a substantial number of competitive advantages that have brought it to its current position of prominence.

To help ensure that Rainforest Alliance, Inc. (the «Rainforest Alliance») complies with the highest standards of financial reporting and lawful and ethical behavior, the Board of Directors of the Rainforest Alliance (the «Board») has established the following procedures for the reporting of illegal or unethical conduct in connection with the Rainforest Alliance's finances, corporate policies, or other aspects of its operations, and the retention and treatment of such complaints, including confidential, anonymous submissions received from directors, officers, employees, and volunteers who provide substantial services to the Rainforest Alliance (who are referred to in this policy as «volunteers»).

Regardless of the fact that there was no substantial connection between the timing of introducing solids to breastfed infants and their risk of preschool obesity, the study still urged parents to keep with the AAP's suggested timing for starting solids: About six months of age.

In particular, the successful applicant will make the case for the acquisition of work by an artist with a substantial connection to the museum's existing collections, city or region.

The vulnerability is almost entirely the result of fast - paced, cost - cutting development patterns in tornado hot zones, and even if there were a greenhouse - tornado connection, actions that constrain greenhouse - gas emissions, while wise in the long run, would not have a substantial influence on climate patterns for decades because of inertia in the climate system.

* A substantial supply charge also had to be paid for connection to the CNG and electricity supply systems.

This medium can drive quick results, reach a substantial audience and make direct connections with people looking for legal help.

Maybe it would be open on the evidence for the trier of fact to make that inference, but it wouldn't amount to a hill of beans, even a campfire's worth, unless the inference was of a necessary connection in which case «substantial» is meaningless, if the issue is factual causation which is clearly what's referred to in para. 10 of Clements.

When deciding if you have substantial grounds for a case, a professional malpractice attorney will look at: the doctor - patient relationship; whether or not the doctor made a mistake in diagnosis, treatment or lack of treatment; the connection between the breach of care and the patient's harm; the extent of harm; and the dates the injury, loss or damage occurred or were discovered.

The usual response is for the defendant to challenge the plaintiff's choice of forum by bringing a motion to stay the action based upon lack of subject - matter jurisdiction and / or personal jurisdiction (the reformulated Van Breda test for assumed jurisdiction based upon a «real and substantial connection»).

The test for determining whether or not PIPEDA will govern the transmission of information is whether there is a «real and substantial connection'to Canada1; therefore, a Canadian company transmitting information abroad, or a foreign company transmitting information into Canada that discloses personal information about Canadians might both lead to a complaint to the Commissioner.

Justice Perell reconfirmed that the statutory cause of action under Part XXIII.1 of the Ontario Securities Act for secondary market misrepresentation applies extra-territorially to trades on foreign stock exchanges when Ontario has a real and substantial connection to a foreign defendant.

These concepts place limits on the extent of liability in order to implement the sound policy of the law that there exist a substantial connection between the tortious conduct and the injury for which compensation is claimed.

Represented a Norwegian - based electric submersible pump designer and manufacturer in connection with a substantial investment in such company by a Houston based private equity firm for the expansion of the business into the United States.

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.

The application of the «real and substantial connection» test for enforcement of foreign judgments was further clarified by the Ontario Court of Appeal in a recent decision, part of a bitter and protracted legal battle over nearly $ 10 billion in environmental damages caused by the operations of Texaco (later acquired by the defendant Chevron) in Ecuador.

The Sacks panel held that a trial judge should not use the word «necessary» in explaining the meaning of the but - for test to a jury, because all the but - for test requires is a «real and substantial connection» between the negligence and the injury.

«The «but for» test recognizes that compensation for negligent conduct should only be made «where a substantial connection between the injury and the defendant's conduct» is present.»

The resolution of this dispute is crucial because after the commencement of the first action for divorce, but before the commencement of the second action for divorce, husband received a substantial financial benefit from his employment in connection with an Initial Public Offering (IPO).

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.

A privilege is likely to be recognized, for example, in connection with the disclosure of information that is relevant to public health or safety, or to the commission of a crime or tort, or to other matters of substantial public concern.

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 held that it had jurisdiction to hear the dispute as the Human Resources Manager for Four Seasons Hotel Limited, which was based in Toronto, had a real and substantial connection to the plaintiff's employment at the Nevis resort sales office in New York.

We have substantial experience of acting for high profile individuals and companies who trust us to achieve successful results for them in dealing with sensitive reputational issues, both pre - and post-publication, and in connection with print and online media.

I wanted to write to thank you and your firm for the substantial support which you provided to me in connection with the installation of my TurboLaw upgrade.

(3) For the purposes of subsection (2)(d), a real and substantial connection is presumed to exist if one or more of the following apply:

Rather, what's happened in BC is that the BCCA has said that but - for means substantial connection (Resurfice) and substantial connection means the same thing as Athey «s materially contributed defined which Athey defined as more than de minimis.

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.

Anybody interested in seeing some of the consequences of the SCC's careless (in my view) use of language need only look at BC where Resurfice and Clements are now being relied on for the view that a but - for cause must be a substantial connection.

Specifically, it clarified the rules for applying the real and substantial test to determining if there is a sufficient connection between the subject matter of the action and the jurisdiction for determining jurisdiction simpliciter.

These cases emphasise the need for foreign litigants to establish a genuine and substantial connection with this jurisdiction.

Thus, in applying the «but for» test, the trial judge was required to consider not just whether the defendant's conduct was the sole cause of the plaintiff's disabling pain, but also whether the plaintiff had established a substantial connection between the accident and that pain, beyond the de minimus [sic] level.

The author argues that the Muscutt factors have obscured what the Supreme Court intended to be the core of the jurisdictional analysis: the need for a real and substantial connection, in the sense of a link or nexus, between the action and the forum.

Several commentators have suggested that the expansion of the «real and substantial connection» test to include notions of fairness or foreign enforceability, and the overlap with factors that should really be left for the second - stage «forum» analysis, is not only contrary to established precedent, but has resulted in confusion and uncertainty for both judges and litigants.

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.»

This test «recognizes that compensation for negligent conduct should only be made «where a substantial connection between the injury and the defendant's conduct» is present»: Resurfice Corp. v. Hanke, 2007 SCC 7 (CanLII), 2007 SCC 7 at paras. 21 - 23.

Whatever else Clements means, it unquestionably holds that the but - for test is a test based on «necessity», not merely «substantial connection» beyond de minimus, and that «material contribution» is not a reference to some method of establishing factual causation on the balance of probability.

Farrant — that is, Athey's material contributing to injury in the guise of but - for as a «substantial connection» — still lives in British Columbia, even after Clements.

In the BCCA's defence, the view that that a necessary factual cause — the meaning of but - for — has to be a «substantial connection» between the negligence and the injury seems to be what Resurfice held.

Those facts identify and locate the primary elements of the claim... 70 The fact that, in the absence of legislative intervention, the plaintiff's pleadings are considered as the primary source of the search for a «real and substantial connection» to the chosen forum promotes order, clarity and certainty.

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».

[11] Thus, in applying the «but for» test, the trial judge was required to consider not just whether the defendant's conduct was the sole cause of the plaintiff's disabling pain, but also whether the plaintiff had established a substantial connection between the accident and that pain, beyond the de minimus level.

[16] In support of its argument, the Attorney General relied on this Court's decision in Equustek for the proposition that the court has in personam jurisdiction over Craigslist because, by conducting business in BC, it has a real and substantial connection to the province.

[11] Thus, in applying the «but for» test, the trial judge was required to consider not just whether the defendant's conduct was the sole cause of the plaintiff's disabling pain, but also whether the plaintiff had established a substantial connection between the accident and that pain, beyond the de [minimis] level.

[59] The primary test to be applied in determining causation is commonly articulated as the «but for» test: a defendant will be fully liable for the harm suffered by a plaintiff, even if other causal factors were at play, so long as the plaintiff establishes a «substantial connection» between the injuries and the defendant's negligence beyond the de minimus range: Farrant v. Latkin, 2011 BCCA 336 (B.C.C.A), at paras 9 and 11; Athey v. Leonati, [1996] 3 S.C.R. 458; Blackwater v. Plint, 2005 SCC 58; Resurfice Corp. v. Hanke, 2007 SCC 7; Clements v.Clements,, 2012 SCC 32.

It's a decision that stands in sharp contrast to Van Breda, where Canadian courts were able to claim jurisdiction, for a case involving injuries on a Cuban resort, based on a test establishing «real and substantial connection» to Canada.

The criteria for establishing «connection» will need to take account of situations where there are substantial disputes, overlapping claims or justifiable uncertainty in relation to the identification of the traditional owner group.