The Supreme Court of Canada released its decision this morning in Momentous.ca Corp. v. Canadian American Association of Professional Baseball Ltd., 2012 SCC 9 (SCC). A copy of my brief case comment entitled “A “Momentous” Decision on Consent-Based Jurisdiction“, OBA Civil Litigation Section “Keeping Tabs” Volume 19, No. 2 January/Janvier 2011, is available here. (more…)
Archive for the ‘litigation’ Category
Emir Aly Crowne (né Mohammed) (University of Windsor – Faculty of Law) has posted a case comment on the recent Ontario Court of Appeal decision in Tucows.Com Co. v. Lojas Renner S.A., 2011 ONCA 548 entitled ”Greener Pastures for Tucows (via SSRN), Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice (Oxford), October 12, 2011. See also my previous post here.
Professor Crowne argues that it is debatable that domain names can or should be considered property.
I find this argument intriguing; particularly, since domain names are a form of intangibles that may be part of a bundle of rights that are enforceable, either in personam or in rem, depending on the characteristics of the intellectual property itself. (more…)
I received a copy of an email blast from Sylvie Rodrigue, Chair of the National CBA Task Force on Class Actions this morning announcing that on August 14, 2011, the Council of the Canadian Bar Association:
- approved as best practices the Canadian Judicial Protocol for the Management of Multi-Jurisdictional Class Actions; and
- endorsed the ABA “Protocol on Court-to-Court Communications in Canada – U.S. Cross-Border Class Actions” and “Notice Protocol: Coordinating Notice(s) to the Class(es) in Multijurisdictional Proceedings.” (more…)
Kovachis v. Dunn, 2011 ONSC 4174 (CanLII) confirms that failure to renew a writ of fieri facias (also referred to as a writ of seizure and sale or writ of execution) within the 20-year limitation period under the old Limitations Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. L.15 (the old Act) results in a time-bar of the enforcement of the underlying judgment under the transition provisions of the Limitations Act, 2002, S.O. 2002, C. 24, Sch. B, (the new Act). (more…)
Whytock and Quintanilla, “The New Multipolarity in Transnational Litigation: Foreign Courts, Foreign Judgments, and Foreign Law”July 20, 2011
Christopher A. Whytock (University of California, Irvine, School of Law) and Marcus S. Quintanilla (O’Melveny & Myers LLP) have posted “The New Multipolarity in Transnational Litigation: Foreign Courts, Foreign Judgments, and Foreign Law”, Southwestern Journal of International Law, forthcoming. The abstract reads:
Conventional wisdom suggests that the transnational litigation system is essentially unipolar, or perhaps bipolar, with the United States and the United Kingdom acting as the leading providers of courts and law for transnational disputes. Our overarching conjecture is that this unipolar (or bipolar) era – if it ever existed at all – has passed, and that transnational litigation is entering an era of ever increasing multipolarity. If this intuition is correct, then it will be increasingly important for U.S. judges and lawyers to be comfortable handling a wide range of conflict-of-laws problems, and prepared to consult closely with their colleagues abroad.
In this Article – based on our remarks at the International Law Weekend-West Conference held at Southwestern Law School in February 2011 – we develop three aspects of this conjecture, corresponding to three dimensions of the new multipolarity in transnational litigation. In Part I, we discuss the growing relative importance of non-U.S. forums for transnational litigation. In Part II, we highlight the potential proliferation of foreign judgments brought to the United States for recognition or enforcement. And in Part III, we consider the pervasiveness of foreign law issues that are likely to confront U.S. judges and lawyers, and the accompanying challenges of making determinations of foreign law in the wake of the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals’ recent decision in Bodum USA, Inc. v. La Cafetière, Inc.
A .pdf copy of the article may be downloaded from SSRN here.
- Ryan M. Vassar, “Litigation Parallelisms: A Comment on Parallel Proceedings and Anti-Suit Injunctions Spanning the Parallels and Meridians” (thetrialwarrior.com)
- Call for Papers and Proposals: “Border Skirmishes: The Intersection Between Litigation and International Commercial Arbitration” (lawprofessors.typepad.com)
- Monestier on Transnational Class Actions (lawprofessors.typepad.com)
- Tanya J. Monestier, “Transnational Class Actions and the Illusory Search for Res Judicata” (thetrialwarrior.com)