University of Calgary Faculty of Law ABLawg.ca logo over mountains

Author: Jassmine Girgis Page 3 of 10

B.A. (Calgary); JD (With Distinction) (Western); LL.M. (Cambridge). Associate Professor. Member of the Alberta Bar. Please click here for more information.

How Qualex Restricted the Scope of Redwater

By

On September 6, 2024

In Bankruptcy and Insolvency

By: Jassmine Girgis

Case commented on: Qualex-Landmark Towers Inc v 12-10 Capital Corp, 2024 ABCA 115

PDF Version: How Qualex Restricted the Scope of Redwater

In Qualex-Landmark Towers Inc v 12-10 Capital Corp, 2024 ABCA 115 (CanLII) (Qualex CA), the Alberta Court of Appeal issued a strong decision overturning the lower court and establishing two important points: first, the test from Newfoundland and Labrador v AbitibiBowater Inc, 2012 SCC 67 (CanLII) (the Abitibi test), which the Supreme Court of Canada applied in Orphan Well Association v Grant Thornton Ltd, 2019 SCC 5 (CanLII) (Redwater), does not apply outside of insolvency proceedings, and second, only a regulator can enforce public duties.

Read More

Good Faith and Honest Performance and the Convergence between Common Law and Civil Law

By

On June 7, 2024

In Contracts

By: Jassmine Girgis

Case Commented On: Ponce v Société d’investissements Rhéaume ltée, 2023 SCC 25 (CanLII)

PDF Version: Good Faith and Honest Performance and the Convergence between Common Law and Civil Law

The topic of good faith in the realm of contracts once again made it to the Supreme Court of Canada in 2023, but this time, in a case dealing with good faith as it arises under the Civil Code of Québec, CQLR c CCQ-1991 (Civil Code).

Read More

New Technology and Contract Formation: The Continuing Evolution of the Common Law

By

On June 6, 2024

In Contracts

By: Jassmine Girgis

Case Commented On: South West Terminal Ltd v Achter Land, 2023 SKKB 116 (Can LII)

PDF Version: New Technology and Contract Formation: The Continuing Evolution of the Common Law

In South West Terminal Ltd v Achter Land, 2023 SKKB 116 (Can LII) (Achter Land), Justice T.J. Keene stated: “this court cannot (nor should it) attempt to stem the tide of technology and common usage – this appears to be the new reality in Canadian society and courts will have to be ready to meet the new challenges that may arise from the use of emojis and the like” (at para 40).

Read More

What Are “Unrelated Assets” When It Comes to Environmental Reclamation Obligations? The Lending Industry Needs to Know

By

On November 15, 2023

In Corporate / Commercial, Creditors’ Remedies, Environmental, Insolvency, Oil & Gas

By: Jassmine Girgis

Case Commented On: Mantle Materials Group, Ltd v Travelers Capital Corp, 2023 ABCA 302 (CanLII)

PDF Version: What Are “Unrelated Assets” When It Comes to Environmental Reclamation Obligations? The Lending Industry Needs to Know

In recent years, the courts have seen many cases dealing with unfunded environmental reclamation obligations. Although these obligations have long raised issues, the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Orphan Well Association v Grant Thornton Ltd, 2019 SCC 5 (CanLII) (“Redwater”) commenced a new era for determining the priority for environmental end-of-life obligations in Canadian insolvencies (see my earlier post on Redwater, Lessons from Redwater: Disregard the AbitibiBowater Test and Legislate Super Priority for the Regulator).

Read More

There is No Presumption of Loss Flowing from a Breach of the Contractual Duty of Honest Performance

By

On November 7, 2023

In Contracts

By: Jassmine Girgis

Case commented on: Bhatnagar v Cresco Labs Inc, 2023 ONCA 401 (CanLII)

PDF Version: There is No Presumption of Loss Flowing from a Breach of the Contractual Duty of Honest Performance

In Bhatnagar v Cresco Labs Inc, 2023 ONCA 401 (“Cresco Labs”), the Ontario Court of Appeal addressed whether the Supreme Court’s decision in CM Callow Inc v Zollinger, 2020 SCC 45 (CanLII) (“Callow”) created a legal presumption of loss once a court finds a breach of the contractual duty of good faith. The ONCA found that there is no presumption of loss and that a plaintiff claiming a loss of opportunity has the burden of providing evidence.

Read More

Page 3 of 10

Previous

Next

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén