Sentences with phrase «supreme act of faith»

It is the supreme act of faith.

Not exact matches

This phrase is the basis of the catholic doctrine that «unaided human reason is unable to reach certitude, and that the fundamental act of human knowledge consists in an act of faith, and the supreme criterion of certitude is authority».

Among them, he represented the successful appellant Harish Bhasin, in Bhasin v. Hrynew, in which the Supreme Court of Canada for the first time recognized a legal duty to act honestly and in good faith in their contractual obligations.

The court also referred to a unanimous judgment from the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC), in which the SCC recognized a general organizing principle of good faith contractual performance — i.e., that there is a common law duty which applies to all contracts to act honestly in the performance of contractual obligations.

The Ontario Supreme Court stated that «the grantor of a right of first refusal must act reasonably and in good faith in relation to that right, and must not act in a fashion designed to eviscerate the very right which has been given».

Prior to 2008 courts in Canada followed the Supreme Court of Canada's decision in Wallace v. United Grain Growers Ltd. 4 and simply extend the dismissed employee's notice period of it where found that the employer had engaged in acts of bad faith at the time of dismissal.

Under the umbrella of the duty of good faith, the Supreme Court also recognized a new common law contractual duty: the duty to act honestly in the performance of contractual obligations.

Secondly, the Supreme Court of Canada recently held that good - faith contractual performance is an «organizing principle» of contract law in Canada's common law jurisdictions, but under Quebec law, the duty to act in good faith is statutorily implied in every contract and at every stage of the contractual relationship.

From R. v. Powley in 2003 (which recognized that Métis communities have pre-existing aboriginal rights protected by s. 35) to Cunningham v. Alberta in 2011 (wherein Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin urged that «the time has finally come for recognition of the Métis as a unique and distinct people») to Manitoba Métis Federation v. Canada in 2013 (which recognized the outstanding constitutional grievance of the Manitoba Métis flowing from land grant provisions set out in s. 31 of the Manitoba Act, 1870), the Supreme Court of Canada has been consistent and unequivocal: s. 35 demands good faith and meaningful negotiations and reconciliation with the Métis people as well.

Although the court in 888394 Ontario Inc. v. Cornwall Centre Road Properties Inc. did consider briefly the nature of the duty to act in good faith in completing the contract, it would have been greatly assisted in its assessment by the more fulsome analysis and the clearly stated benchmarks provided by the Supreme Court of Canada in Bhasin v. Hrynew.

The owners of a sprawling Wyoming cattle ranch acted in bad faith by replacing their longstanding broker after he assembled a promising deal, and were wrong to deny him commission when the deal closed, the Supreme Court of Wyoming ruled in December.