Archive for the ‘“strong cause” test’ Category

Two Important Ontario Attornment Decisions

September 16, 2013

The first decision is from the Court of Appeal for Ontario in Van Damme v. Gelber2013 ONCA 388  (Ont. C.A.) per  Doherty, J.A. (Cronk and Lauwers JJ.A. concurring). In Van Damme, the plaintiff, a successful businessman and philanthropist obtained judgment in the Supreme Court of New York against the defendant, Nahum Gelber (“Gelber”), relating to Van Damme’s purchase of a painting from Gelber. The painting was being held in Ontario pursuant to an Ontario court order.  Van Damme successfully moved in the Ontario proceeding for an order of recognition and enforcement New York judgment in Ontario and a variation of the earlier Ontario order directing that the painting be released to him, with costs on a substantial indemnity basis. (more…)

The Perils of Drafting Ineffective Forum Selection Clauses

May 31, 2013

Today’s decision of the Court of Appeal for Ontario in 2249659 Ontario Ltd. v. Sparkasse Siegen, 2013 ONCA 354 addresses issues pertaining to jurisdiction simpliciter, the effect of forum selection clauses and forum non conveniens. (more…)

“Strong Cause”, not “Forum Non Conveniens”, is the appropriate test for enforcing forum selection clauses

August 9, 2012

The recent Ontario decision in 2249659 Ontario Ltd. et al. v. Sparkasse Siegen et al., 2012 ONSC 3128 (CanLII)  provides a good summary of the “strong cause” test for enforcing the parties’ choice of forum. The motion judge cites the recent judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada in Momentous.Ca Corporation v Canadian American Association of Professional Baseball Limited2012 SCC 9 (CanLII), 2012 SCC 9, where the Court at para. 9 states: (more…)

Forum Selection Clauses Do Not Bind Non-Signatories, Ontario Court Rules

May 9, 2012
MasterCard logo used on cards 1997 to present.

MasterCard logo used on cards 1997 to present. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The recent decision of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice in Aldo Group Inc. v. Moneris Solutions Corporation, 2012 ONSC 2581 (CanLII) poses the question:

  Can a forum selection clause bind a person who was not a signatory to the contract containing the clause? 

In a lengthy judgment, D.M. Brown J. of the Toronto Commercial List Court considered a motion brought by the co-defendant, MasterCard International, Inc. [“Mastercard”] asserting that the claim brought by the plaintiff, Aldo Group Inc. a footwear retailer [“Aldo”] was subject to a forum selection clause specifying the New York courts by reason of the nature of the plaintiff’s claims pleaded against MasterCard, notwithstanding that Aldo was not a privy to either of the two contracts containing the New York forum selection clause. (more…)

The Supreme Court of Canada Conflict of Laws Trilogy: Part I

April 19, 2012

Following up on yesterday’s post, this will be a two-part series of posts on the Supreme Court of Canada conflict of laws trilogy in:

Club Resorts Ltd. v. Van Breda, 2012 SCC  17 (“Van Breda”);

Éditions Écosociété Inc. v. Banro Corp., 2012 SCC 18 (“Banro”) and

Breeden v. Black, 2012 SCC 19. (“Black”).

In Part I, I will critically analyze the Van Breda decision and its implications to Canadian conflict of laws generally. In Part II, I will discuss the Banro and Black decisions from the perspective of internet defamation, corporate liability, choice of law and libel tourism. (more…)


%d bloggers like this: