JSS Barristers | Insights

Part 7 of Rules of Court Continue to be Underutilized in Alberta

By Charlotte Stokes (On leave)|February 2, 2021

In Hannam v Medicine Hat School District No. 76, 2020 ABCA 343, the Alberta Court of Appeal noted that despite the culture shift called for in the Supreme Court’s decision in Hryniak v Mauldin, 2014 SCC 7, the summary procedures provided for in Part 7 of the Rules of Court continue to be underutilized in Alberta. In emphasizing this point, the Court of Appeal urged both the judiciary and litigants to make more robust use of these processes.

Pursuing Pots of Gold: Litigation Funding - The Supreme Court of Canada Speaks

September 22, 2020

Christa Nicholson, former Partner, comments on a recent unanimous decision of the Supreme Court of Canada that adds legitimacy to third party litigation funding as a potential path by which to maximize recovery for an insolvent company's creditors, as well as for use in commercial litigation and arbitration contexts.

The Delay Rules in a World of Suspended Limitations

By Gavin Price & Charlotte Stokes (On leave)|September 16, 2020

How did the Ministerial Order of March 30, 2020, affect Rules 4.31 and 4.33? Gavin Price and Charlotte Stokes take a look at how the courts may interpret the Order's effect on what is sometimes referred as the "Delay Rules."

Hit & Run/Uninsured Accidents - 5 Things to Know

By Maureen McCartney-Cameron|August 27, 2020

Maureen McCartney-Cameron points out the 5 things you need to know if you've been involved in a hit & run or an accident with an uninsured driver.

COVID-19: Class Actions Arising From a Pandemic

By Gavin Price & Kajal Ervin & Andrea MacLean|July 29, 2020

Given the current situation, Courts are likely to consider factual nuances in each class action on a case-by-case basis, including how the defendants responded to the unexpected and unprecedented change in making their decisions.

The Uber Decisions: Justice Come Heller High Water? Litigating Unconscionability

By Bryan C. Duguid KC, FCIArb & David J. Marshall|July 14, 2020

The SCC decision in Uber v Heller raises questions about how unconscionability will be litigated and what evidence may be needed and admissible in such litigation.

The Uber Decision: Justice Come Heller High Water? Improvident Bargain

By Bryan C. Duguid KC, FCIArb & David J. Marshall|July 8, 2020

In Part 2 of our analysis on the recent decision of Uber v Heller, we discuss how the wide application of improvidence could lead to commercial uncertainty.

Pierringer Agreements and the Principle Against Overcompensation

By Andrew Wilson KC|July 7, 2020

Notwithstanding a settling Defendants’ ostensible entitlement to a settlement surplus, the Court appears to have meaningfully limited the circumstances in which a settlement surplus will be recognized.

The Uber Decision: Justice Come Heller High Water? Unequal Bargaining Power

By Bryan C. Duguid KC, FCIArb & David J. Marshall|July 2, 2020

In the recent decision by the SCC in Uber v Heller, the majority confirms that the doctrine of unconscionability applies to all contracts. This undermines commercial certainty, as little guidance is provided for its application.

An Update on Social Host Liability in Canada

By Maureen McCartney-Cameron|June 29, 2020

In McCormick v Plambeck, the British Columbia Court Supreme Court recently considered whether liability might be imposed on social hosts whose guests were teenage minors.

Welcome to JSS Barristers Insights. Here you’ll find a variety of thought-leadership, from concise summaries of regulations to more in-depth analyses of how Rules of Court can affect the courts’ decisions.