PDF version: Recognizing Foreign Divorces: The Public Policy Defence

Case considered: Zhang v. Lin, 2010 ABQB 420

Zhang v. Lin raised the question of whether a divorce granted in Texas should be recognized in Alberta. Interestingly, the court determined that it should refuse recognition of the Texas decree because it violated Canadian public policy. In the past, such a defence has been seen as more of a theoretical than a real possibility. In Zhang, however, the court came to that conclusion very readily. What concerned the Alberta court was not so much the divorce itself but the apparent lack of corollary relief by way of child and spousal support available to the respondent in Texas.

Read the rest of this entry »

Case considered: Laasch v. Turenne, 2009 ABQB 267

PDF version: Enforcing a Montana Judgment in Alberta: A Perilous Pursuit

A Montana resident secures a large money judgment in his or her home state. The judgment creditor needs to enforce that judgment in Alberta because the judgment debtor resides and maintains assets in this province. You are retained to effect the enforcement of that judgment. What are the available options? What are the advantages and disadvantages of each? These questions lay at the heart of Laasch v. Turenne.

Read the rest of this entry »

Cases considered: Robinson v. Fiesta Hotel Group Resorts, 2008 ABQB 311

PDF Version: Ability to Sue in Alberta for Injuries Sustained on a Holiday Abroad

If like many Canadians you decide to take a winter vacation to follow the sun and you sustain serious personal injuries because of the negligence of your hotel, you may well want to sue the hotel in Alberta. Can you do so? Is it worthwhile to do so? These were two of the questions facing James Robinson.

Read the rest of this entry »

Cases Considered: Wheeler v. 1000128 Alberta Ltd., 2008 ABQB 70,

PDF Version: Jurisdiction In Personam and the Rules for Service Ex Juris

Introduction
Wheeler v. 1000128 Alberta Ltd., 2008 ABQB 70, was a complicated case in which the plaintiff alleged that he, and other members of a proposed class, had incurred losses as a result of the breach by the various defendants of the insider trading rules under Alberta’s Securities Act, R.S.A. 2000, c. S-4. More specifically, the plaintiff alleged that, in a series of steps, China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC), acting through its subsidiaries, and in particular 1000128 Alberta Ltd. (Alberta Co.), purchased the shares of PetroKazakhstan Inc. (PKZ), an international energy company with its head office in Calgary. He further alleged that, in the course of these steps, various of the defendants, with the knowledge of and in conspiracy with the other defendants, became aware of, acted upon, and disclosed to Alberta Co. certain material facts in breach of the Securities Act. According to the plaintiff, Alberta Co. then used this information to purchase shares in PKZ with money supplied by CNPC International Ltd. (CNPCI), a subsidiary of CNPC.

Read the rest of this entry »

Cases Considered: Re Foote (Estate Of), 2007 ABQB 654

Keywords: conflict of laws, jurisdiction, estates, poison pill clause, family relief

PDF Version: A Fight Over Estate Jurisdiction

Introduction

Conflicts scholars tend to be fascinated with choice of law problems and the methods for their resolution. Most theoretical work has been directed towards the choice of law question and the basis on which foreign law is applied by local courts. In his classic Conflict of Laws (2nd ed. 1954), Falconbridge spoke barely a word on issues of jurisdiction. Indeed, he stated that the “scope of the subject of the conflict of laws . . . does not cover the topic of jurisdiction of courts and the related topic of the enforcement of foreign judgments” (p. 6).

Read the rest of this entry »

Cases Considered: Can-Am Produce & Trading Ltd. v. Kan Yan Trading Co. Ltd., 2007 ABQB 738

PDF Version: Choice-of-Law Principles and the Guarantees Acknowledgment Act

Introduction

Alberta’s Guarantees Acknowledgment Act (G.A.A.), R.S.A. 2000, c. G-11, is a unique piece of legislation. It requires an individual guarantor in most cases to appear before a notary public and acknowledge that he or she is the person who executed the guarantee. The notary must then examine the person to satisfy him or herself that the guarantor is aware of the contents of the guarantee and understands its effect. Upon being so satisfied, the notary then issues a certificate to that effect which must be signed by the guarantor.

Read the rest of this entry »