This week the Supreme Court of Canada granted an application for
leave to appeal the decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal in Yaiguaje v. Chevron
Corporation 2013 ONCA 758. As a result, the Supreme Court
of Canada will review the jurisdictional requirements for the
enforcement of foreign judgments in Canada.
The case is particularly important to multi-national enterprises
because it involves an attempt to enforce in Canada a foreign
judgment against a non-Canadian judgment debtor and against its
Canadian subsidiary, which was not a party to the litigation. The
foreign judgment debtor had no presence and no assets in
The appeal raises several issues. The first issue is whether
there must be a real and substantial connection between the subject
matter of the litigation and Ontario for an Ontario court to have
jurisdiction to enforce the foreign judgment. The earlier decisions
held that no such requirement exists and accepted jurisdiction over
the non-Canadian judgment debtor on the basis of valid service
The second issue is whether the lower courts were correct in
holding that an Ontario court has jurisdiction over a Canadian
subsidiary of a non-Canadian foreign judgment debtor on the basis
of its presence in Ontario and economic relationship with its
ultimate parent company, the judgment debtor.
The third issue is whether a court has discretion to stay
enforcement proceedings based on its perception that there is no
reasonable prospect for recovery against either of the defendants,
where the discretion is exercised prior to argument on the merits
of the enforcement proceedings.
It's not often that our little blog intersects with such titanic struggles as the U.S. presidential race – and by using the term "titanic" I certainly don't mean to suggest that anything disastrous is in the future.
J.J. v. C.C., is an interesting case in which the court held that an automotive garage owes a duty to minor children to secure the vehicles on the premises by locking the cars and safely storing the car keys...
In Irwin v. Alberta Veterinary Medical Association, 2015 ABCA 396, the Alberta Court of Appeal found that the "ABVMA" failed to afford procedural fairness to a veterinarian undergoing an incapacity assessment.
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).