Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Table of panels
- List of figures
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- Terminology
- Table of Latin phrases
- List of abbreviations
- Table of cases
- Table of cases (European Court of Justice, numerical order)
- Table of legislative instruments
- PART I STARTING OFF
- PART II JURISDICTION
- PART III FOREIGN JUDGMENTS
- 13 Introduction to Part III
- 14 EC law
- 15 English law: jurisdiction
- 16 English law: defences
- 17 The Canadian conflicts (judgments) revolution
- 18 US law: some highlights
- PART IV PROCEDURE
- PART V CHOICE OF LAW
- PART VI EXTRATERRITORIALITY
- Bibliography
- Index
17 - The Canadian conflicts (judgments) revolution
from PART III - FOREIGN JUDGMENTS
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Table of panels
- List of figures
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- Terminology
- Table of Latin phrases
- List of abbreviations
- Table of cases
- Table of cases (European Court of Justice, numerical order)
- Table of legislative instruments
- PART I STARTING OFF
- PART II JURISDICTION
- PART III FOREIGN JUDGMENTS
- 13 Introduction to Part III
- 14 EC law
- 15 English law: jurisdiction
- 16 English law: defences
- 17 The Canadian conflicts (judgments) revolution
- 18 US law: some highlights
- PART IV PROCEDURE
- PART V CHOICE OF LAW
- PART VI EXTRATERRITORIALITY
- Bibliography
- Index
Summary
Canada is a federation made up of a number of provinces. All except Quebec apply the common law. For conflict-of-laws purposes, each province is a separate country, and the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments, including judgments from another province, are governed by provincial law. Until 1990, the rules of jurisdiction applied for this purpose were the same as in England. In 1990, however, the position was radically altered by the judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada in our next case.
Jurisdiction of the foreign court
Canada
Morguard Investments Ltd v. De Savoye
Supreme Court of Canada
[1990] 3 SCR 1077; (1990) 76 DLR (4th) 256; [1991] 2 WWR 217; (1990) 52 BCLR (2d) 160
Background
De Savoye was liable to Morguard for a debt under a mortgage of land in Alberta. He had originally resided in Alberta, but later moved to British Columbia. He defaulted on the mortgage and Morguard sued him in Alberta. The court took jurisdiction under provincial rules permitting service of the writ outside Alberta. De Savoye received the writ but did not defend, and a default judgment was given against him. Morguard sold the land, but the money raised was insufficient to cover the outstanding debt; so it brought enforcement proceedings in British Columbia for the balance. Under the English rules, the judgment would not have been enforced because the Alberta courts would not be regarded as having had jurisdiction.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- International Commercial LitigationText, Cases and Materials on Private International Law, pp. 382 - 393Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2009