|
Morguard Investments Ltd V De Savoye
''Morguard Investments Ltd v De Savoye'', 9903 SCR 1077 is the leading decision of the Supreme Court of Canada on the enforcement of extraprovincial judgments. The Court held that the standard for enforcing a default judgment from a different province is not the same as if it were from another country; rather the Court adopts the test from ''Indyka v Indyka'', 9691 AC 33 ( HL) and ''Moran v Pyle National (Canada) Ltd'', 9751 SCR 393 where there must be a "real and substantial connection" between the petitioner and the country or territory exercising jurisdiction. Background De Savoye, the appellant, was the mortgagor of a property in Alberta and resided in British Columbia. The mortgage defaulted and the respondents brought action in Alberta, for the land they had mortgaged in that same province. The appellant chose not to appear or defend his actions. The respondents obtained judgment ''ex juris'' in the foreclosure action, and then obtained orders for the judicial sale of the pr ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Supreme Court Of Canada
The Supreme Court of Canada (SCC; french: Cour suprême du Canada, CSC) is the Supreme court, highest court in the Court system of Canada, judicial system of Canada. It comprises List of Justices of the Supreme Court of Canada, nine justices, whose decisions are the ultimate application of Canadian law, and grants permission to between 40 and 75 litigants each year to appeal decisions rendered by provincial, territorial and federal Appeal, appellate courts. The Supreme Court is bijural, hearing cases from two major legal traditions (common law and Civil law (legal system), civil law) and bilingual, hearing cases in both Official bilingualism in Canada, official languages of Canada (English language, English and French language, French). The effects of any judicial decision on the common law, on the interpretation of statutes, or on any other application of law, can, in effect, be nullified by legislation, unless the particular decision of the court in question involves applicatio ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Full Faith And Credit
Article IV, Section 1 of the United States Constitution, the Full Faith and Credit Clause, addresses the duty that states within the United States have to respect the "public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state." According to the Supreme Court, there is a difference between the credit owed to laws (i.e. legislative measures and common law) as compared to the credit owed to judgments. Judges and lawyers agree on the meaning of the clause with respect to the recognition of judgments rendered by one state in the courts of another. Barring exceptional circumstances, one state must enforce a judgment by a court in another, unless that court lacked jurisdiction, even if the enforcing court otherwise disagrees with the result. At present, it is widely agreed that this Clause of the Constitution has a minimal impact on a court's choice of law decision provided that no state’s sovereignty is infringed, although this Clause of the Constitution was once interpre ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Canadian Civil Procedure Case Law
Canadians (french: Canadiens) are people identified with the country of Canada. This connection may be residential, legal, historical or cultural. For most Canadians, many (or all) of these connections exist and are collectively the source of their being ''Canadian''. Canada is a multilingual and multicultural society home to people of groups of many different ethnic, religious, and national origins, with the majority of the population made up of Old World immigrants and their descendants. Following the initial period of French and then the much larger British colonization, different waves (or peaks) of immigration and settlement of non-indigenous peoples took place over the course of nearly two centuries and continue today. Elements of Indigenous, French, British, and more recent immigrant customs, languages, and religions have combined to form the culture of Canada, and thus a Canadian identity. Canada has also been strongly influenced by its linguistic, geographic, and ec ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Conflict Of Laws Case Law
Conflict may refer to: Arts, entertainment, and media Films * ''Conflict'' (1921 film), an American silent film directed by Stuart Paton * ''Conflict'' (1936 film), an American boxing film starring John Wayne * ''Conflict'' (1937 film), a Swedish drama film directed by Per-Axel Branner * ''Conflict'' (1938 film), a French drama film directed by Léonide Moguy * ''Conflict'' (1945 film), an American suspense film starring Humphrey Bogart * ''Catholics: A Fable'' (1973 film), or ''The Conflict'', a film starring Martin Sheen * ''Judith'' (1966 film) or ''Conflict'', a film starring Sophia Loren * ''Samar'' (1999 film) or ''Conflict'', a 1999 Indian film by Shyam Benegal Games * ''Conflict'' (series), a 2002–2008 series of war games for the PS2, Xbox, and PC * ''Conflict'' (video game), a 1989 Nintendo Entertainment System war game * '' Conflict: Middle East Political Simulator'', a 1990 strategy computer game Literature and periodicals * ''Conflict'' (novel) ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
List Of Supreme Court Of Canada Cases
The Supreme Court of Canada is the court of last resort and final appeal in Canada. Cases that are successfully appealed to the Court are generally of national importance. Once a case is decided the Court will publish written reasons for the decision that consist of one or more reasons from any number of the nine justices. Understanding the background of the cases, their reasons and the authorship can be important and insightful as each judge may have varying beliefs in legal theory and understanding. List of cases by Court era * List of Supreme Court of Canada cases (Richards Court through Fauteux Court): This list includes cases from the formation of the Court on April 8, 1875, through to the retirement of Gérald Fauteux on December 23, 1973. * List of Supreme Court of Canada cases (Laskin Court): This list includes cases from the rise of Bora Laskin through to his death on March 26, 1984. * List of Supreme Court of Canada cases (Dickson Court): This list includes cases from ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Beals V Saldanha
''Beals v Saldanha'', 0033 S.C.R. 416, 2003 SCC 72 is a leading Supreme Court of Canada decision on the conflict of laws, where the Court established the requirements to enforce foreign judgments in Canada. The Court held that foreign judgments were enforceable in Canada where there was a "real and substantial connection" between the foreign jurisdiction and the subject matter giving rise to the claim. Background Geoffrey and Leueen Saldanha and Dominic Thivy were residents of Ontario and sold lots they owned in Florida to Frederick and Patricia Beals. Beals brought an action against Saldanha and Thivy when it was discovered that the defendants did not actually own the property they sold. A defence was filed with the Court but did nothing afterwards and defaulted. A jury awarded Beals $260,000 in damages. Thivy and Saldanha were informed by a lawyer in Ontario that the judgment could not be enforced and so they did nothing. Soon Beals brought an action in Ontario to enforce the ju ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Hunt V T&N Plc
''Hunt v T&N plc'', 9934 S.C.R. 289 is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of Canada on conflict of laws. The Court ruled that the Quebec law prohibiting the removal of company documents from the province was constitutionally inapplicable to a British Columbia court order. The decision was significant in that it affirmed much of the reasoning from ''Morguard Investments Ltd. v. De Savoye'' (1990) and further held that the principles first identified in Morguard are fundamental to the constitution. Background George Hunt, a resident of British Columbia, was diagnosed with cancer caused by the inhalation of asbestos fibres from a product that was manufactured in Quebec. As part of his action in British Columbia he tried to get an order to retrieve documents from the manufacturer in Quebec. The Quebec ''Business Concerns Records Act'' prohibited the removal of documents outside of the province. Hunt attempted to challenge the law as unconstitutional. Hunt attempted to argue that ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Court Of Appeal For Ontario
The Court of Appeal for Ontario (frequently referred to as the Ontario Court of Appeal or ONCA) is the appellate court for the province of Ontario, Canada. The seat of the court is Osgoode Hall in downtown Toronto, also the seat of the Law Society of Ontario and the Divisional Court of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice. Description The Court is composed of 22 judicial seats, in addition to one or more justices who sit supernumerary. They hear over 1,500 appeals each year, on issues of private law, constitutional law, criminal law, administrative law and other matters. The Supreme Court of Canada hears appeals from less than 3% of the decisions of the Court of Appeal for Ontario, therefore in a practical sense, the Court of Appeal is the last avenue of appeal for most litigants in Ontario. Among the Court of Appeal's most notable decisions was the 2003 ruling in ''Halpern v Canada (AG)'' that found defining marriage as between one man and one woman to violate Section 15 of th ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
In Rem
''In rem'' jurisdiction ("power about or against 'the thing) is a legal term describing the power a court may exercise over property (either real or personal) or a "status" against a person over whom the court does not have ''in personam'' jurisdiction. Jurisdiction ''in rem'' assumes the property or status is the primary object of the action, rather than personal liabilities not necessarily associated with the property. United States Within the U.S. federal court system, jurisdiction ''in rem'' typically refers to the power a federal court may exercise over large items of immoveable property, or real property, located within the court's jurisdiction. The most frequent circumstance in which this occurs in the Anglo-American legal system is when a suit is brought in admiralty law against a vessel to satisfy debts arising from the operation or use of that vessel. Within the American state court systems, jurisdiction ''in rem'' may refer to the power the state court may exer ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Reciprocity (international Relations)
In international relations and treaties, the principle of reciprocity states that favors, benefits, or penalties that are granted by one state to the citizens or legal entities of another, should be returned in kind. For example, reciprocity has been used in the reduction of tariffs, the grant of copyrights to foreign authors, the mutual recognition and enforcement of judgments, and the relaxation of travel restrictions and visa requirements. The principle of reciprocity also governs agreements on extradition. Specific and diffuse reciprocity Several theorists have drawn a distinction between specific forms of reciprocity and "diffuse reciprocity" (Keohane 1986). While specific reciprocity is exemplified by international trade negotiations, as suggested above, diffuse reciprocity points to a wider institutionalisation of trust. Through consistent cooperation in an international society, states are seen as building generally accepted standards of behaviour. These general standar ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Default Judgment
Default judgment is a binding judgment in favor of either party based on some failure to take action by the other party. Most often, it is a judgment in favor of a plaintiff when the defendant has not responded to a summons or has failed to appear before a court of law. The failure to take action is the default. The default judgment is the relief requested in the party's original petition. Default can be compared to a forfeit victory in sports. In a civil trial involving damages, a default judgment will enter the amount of damages pleaded in the original complaint. If proof of damages is required, the court may schedule another hearing on that issue. A party can have a default judgment vacated, or set aside, by filing a motion, after the judgment is entered, by showing of a proper excuse. Specific jurisdictions England and Wales How judgment arises In England and Wales, a claimant starts a case by issuing a claim form. This either states a monetary figure on it, together ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Comity
In law, comity is "a practice among different political entities (as countries, states, or courts of different jurisdictions)" involving the "mutual recognition of legislative, executive, and judicial The judiciary (also known as the judicial system, judicature, judicial branch, judiciative branch, and court or judiciary system) is the system of courts that adjudication, adjudicates legal disputes/disagreements and interprets, defends, and app ... acts." Etymology Comity derives from the Latin ''comitas'', courtesy, from ''cemis'', friendly, courteous. International law The doctrine of international comity has been described variously "as a choice-of-law principle, a synonym for private international law, a rule of public international law, a moral obligation, expediency, courtesy, reciprocity, utility, or diplomacy. Authorities disagree as to whether comity is a rule of natural law, Customary international law, custom, treaty, or domestic law. Indeed, there is not even agreem ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
