Archive for the ‘Quebec Civil Code’ Category

Quebec judge issues Letters Rogatory on alleged spoliation of evidence by US and UK lawyers

August 10, 2011
shred

Image by jon.hayes via Flickr

The Quebec court decision in Conseil québécois sur le tabac et la santé c. JTI-MacDonald Corp., 2011 QCCS 2376 (CanLII), involved an application for letters rogatory in two tobacco industry class actions (recently settled on July 4, 2011,  between the Plaintiffs and the Government of Canada.  The Defendants had no part in this Agreement.)

The class plaintiffs sought to examine two attorneys: John Meltzer of London, England and David Schechter of Louisville, Kentucky, USA , whom they alleged were involved directly or indirectly with the spoliation of evidence (destruction of documents) by Imperial Tobacco Canada Ltee (“ITL”) during the early 1990′s:  Mr. Meltzer, then of the firm Lowell, White, Durrant, acted as outside counsel to British American Tobacco (“BAT“) and Mr. Schechter appears to have been in-house counsel at Brown and Williamson (“B&W“).

The Plaintiffs sought an order compelling each Attorney “to appear (near his place of business) to be examined, by way of a videoconference, by the attorneys for Petitioners on all facts of which he has knowledge with respect to the litigation between the parties and to give communication of any documents that may be in his possession and which are relevant to this litigation”. (more…)

Tags:, , , ,
Posted in civil jurisdiction, Civil Litigation, civil procedure, class action, class actions, destruction of evidence, disclosure, discovery, e-discovery, England and Wales, English law, ethics, evidence, Letters of Request, Letters Rogatory, Quebec Civil Code, Rules of Professional Conduct, Spoliation | Leave a Comment »

Quebec Court Declines Jurisdiction Over Proposed Privacy Class Action: St-Arnaud c. Facebook inc.

April 7, 2011

The Quebec Superior Court in St-Arnaud c. Facebook inc.  , 2011 QCCS 1506 (CanLII) has declined jurisdiction in a proposed class action against Facebook relating to breach of privacy claims under Facebook’s terms of service. (more…)

Posted in civil procedure, class action, class actions, exclusive jurisdiction clause, Facebook, forum non conveniens, forum selection, forum selection clause, jurisdiction, Quebec Civil Code | Leave a Comment »

Corporate Liability under International Law: U.S. and Canadian perspectives

January 10, 2011

On September 17, 2010, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit released its decision in Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum ,(06-4800-cv, 06-4876-cv). In a 2-1 split decision, the Court ruled that the Alien Torts Statute (ATS) grants U.S. courts jurisdiction over alleged violations of international law by individuals only, not by corporations. Essentially, the majority opinion held that corporations cannot be sued under the ATS for violations of customary international law because “the concept of corporate liability . . . has not achieved universal recognition or acceptance of a norm in the relations of States with each other.”  (Slip op. at 49).

*Warning: This is a lengthy post (more…)

Posted in aiding-and-abetting, Alien Tort Statute, Bil'In (Village Council) c. Green Park International Inc., Bouzari v. Iran (Islamic Republic), Canada, Canada-US Cross-Border relations, corporate liability, foreign judgments, foreign law, forum of necessity, international human rights, international law, international litigation, jurisdiction, jus cogens, justice, Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum, Quebec Civil Code, R. v. Hape, tort, torts, torture, U.K. Human Rights Act, U.N. Charter, U.S. Courts, Uncategorized, United Nations Security Council, United States Constitution, United States Supreme Court, universal jurisdiction, Van Breda, Yassin c. Green Park International Inc. | 3 Comments »

Tanya J. Monestier on "Lepine v. Canada Post: Ironing Out the Wrinkles in the Inter-Provincial Enforcement of Class Judgments"

October 13, 2009
Tanya J. Monestier (Roger Williams University-School of Law) has posted an article  on SSRN addressing enforceability of national and multi-jurisdictional class judgments entitled: “Lepine v. Canada Post: Ironing Out the Wrinkles in the Inter-Provincial Enforcement of Class Judgments”, The Advocates’ Quarterly, Vol. 34, p. 499, 2008. Here is the abstract:
Later this year, the Supreme Court of Canada will hear argument in the case of Lépine v. Canada Post, on appeal from the Québec Court of Appeal. The case raises several pivotal issues surrounding the enforceability of national or multi-jurisdictional class judgments. First, on what basis can a court assert jurisdiction over a purported member of the plaintiff class who does not reside in the adjudicating forum? Second, how do the doctrines of lis pendens and forum non conveniens affect the recognition of class judgments? Finally, when can recognition of a judgment be refused on the basis that the plaintiff class has been denied natural justice or procedural fairness owing to inadequate notice? The Supreme Court will have the additional challenge of answering these questions within the framework of the Québec Civil Code (C.C.Q.), while appreciating that the decision will have implications for class action practice across the country. This comment does not aim to provide a thorough academic discussion of the intricate issues of the case, but rather to highlight the relevant considerations that may inform the Court’s thinking. The issue of the interprovincial enforceability of class judgments is of critical significance to litigants. It is hoped that the Supreme Court uses Lépine as an opportunity to sort out some of the vexing questions posed by the existence of multi-jurisdictional classes.

Posted in class actions, conflict of laws, forum non conveniens, interprovincial enforceability, judgments, Lepine v. Canada Post, lis pendens, multi-jurisdictional, Quebec Civil Code, Tanya J. Monestier | Leave a Comment »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,587 other followers

%d bloggers like this: