¹ Court Jurisdiction and Proceedings Transfer Act, SBC 2003, c 28 [CJPTA (BC)].

² Declining jurisdiction on the ground of forum non conveniens is governed by ibid, s 11.

³ Ordinary residence is one of the grounds of territorial competence. Ibid, s 3(d).

⁴ The Divorce Act, RSC 1985, c 3 (2nd Supp), ss 4–5 give jurisdiction to grant or vary corollary relief if either former spouse is ordinarily resident in the province, with no discretion to decline the jurisdiction (unless an application for custody is involved). CJPTA (BC), supra note 1, s 12 gives priority to any other applicable statute, such as the Divorce Act, that expressly confers or denies territorial competence in a way that conflicts or is inconsistent with the CJPTA.

⁵ CJPTA (BC), supra note 1; Court Jurisdiction and Proceedings Transfer Act, SS 1997, c C-41.1 [CJPTA (SK)]; Court Jurisdiction and Proceedings Transfer Act, SNS 2003 (2d Sess), c 2 [CJPTA (NS)]. The acts differ slightly.

⁶ See note on Chevron Corp v Yaiguaje, below, under Jurisdiction simpliciter — proceeding to enforce a foreign judgment.

⁷ As defined in the CJPTA (BC), supra note 1, s 7.

⁸ Livingston v IMW Industries Ltd., 2015 BCSC 1627.

⁹ Presumptive connecting factors are the basis for jurisdiction simpliciter at common law, as laid down by Club Resorts Ltd v Van Breda, 2012 SCC 17, [2012] 1 SCR 572 [Van Breda].

¹⁰ Leave to appeal to SCC refused, 36825 (5 May 2016).

¹¹ Trillium Motor World Ltd v General Motors of Canada Ltd, 2014 ONCA 497, 120 OR (3d) 598, noted in (2014) 52 Can YB Int’l L 583.

¹² Tyoga Investments Ltd v Service Alimentaire Desco Inc, 2015 ONSC 3810.

¹³ Neophytou v Fraser, 2015 ONCA 45, 63 CPC (7th) 13.

¹⁴ Orthoarm Inc v American Orthodontics Corp, 2015 ONSC 1880, 125 OR (3d) 312.

¹⁵ Alberta Rules of Court, Alta Reg 124/2010, r 11.25(1)(a).

¹⁶ Ibid, r 11.25(3)(i).

¹⁷ Van Breda, supra note 9 at para 55.

¹⁸ The presumptions in r 11.25(3) are not per se so limited, but r 11.25(2) of the Rules of Court, supra note 15, does distinguish between service elsewhere in Canada and service abroad by requiring leave in the latter case.

¹⁹ QBD Cooling Systems Inc v Sollatek (UK) Ltd, 2015 ONSC 947.

²⁰ Candoo Excavating Services Ltd v Ipex Inc, 2015 ONSC 809, 42 CLR (4th) 153.

²¹ Leave to appeal to SCC refused, 36670 (7 April 2016).

²² As required by Van Breda, supra note 9.

²³ Li v MacNutt & Dumont, 2015 NSSC 53, 356 NSR (2d) 176.

²⁴ Arsenault v Nunavut, 2015 ONSC 4302.

²⁵ Vines v Blaugrund, 2015 BCSC 1525. Compare Neophytou v Fraser, supra note 13, another intra-family lawsuit.

²⁶ Alberta Rules of Court, supra note 15, r 11.25(3)(d).

²⁷ Van Breda, supra note 9 at para 89.

²⁸ Moran v Pyle National (Canada) Ltd, [1975] 1 SCR 393 at 407–09.

²⁹ Gulevich v Miller, 2016 ABCA 17, [2016] 5 WWR 249.

³⁰ Van Breda, supra note 9.

³¹ Brown v Mar Taino SA, 2015 NSSC 348, 367 NSR (2d) 253.

³² Cook v 1293037 Alberta Ltd, 2015 ONSC 7989.

³³ CJPTA (NS), supra note 5.

³⁴ Leave to appeal to SCC refused, 36716 (3 March 2016).

³⁵ Tamminga v Tamminga, 2014 ONCA 478, 375 DLR (4th) 190, noted (2014) 52 Can YB Int’l L 579.

³⁶ Uninsured Automobile Coverage, RRO 1990, Reg 676, s 4(1)(c).

³⁷ Ibrahim v Robinson, 2015 ONCA 21, 380 DLR (4th) 306.

³⁸ Van Breda, supra note 9.

³⁹ Mannarino v Brown Estate, 2015 ONSC 3167, 50 CCLI (5th) 122.

⁴⁰ Sekela v Cordos, 2015 BCSC 732, 77 BCLR (5th) 184.

⁴¹ Goldhar v Haaretz.com, 2015 ONSC 1128, 125 OR (3d) 619, aff’d 2016 ONCA 515.

⁴² Rules of Civil Procedure, RRO 1990, Reg 194, r 17.02(m).

⁴³ The requirement that the jurisdiction of the court of a province must be based on a real and substantial connection that the defendant or the facts of the case have with the province was established in Morguard Investments Ltd. v De Savoye, [1990] 3 SCR 1077; Hunt v T & N Plc, [1993] 4 SCR 289.

⁴⁴ Van Breda, supra note 9.

⁴⁵ Morguard Investments Ltd v De Savoye, [1990] 3 SCR 1077.

⁴⁶ The court referred at para 70 to the principle that rules of court “do not in and of themselves confer jurisdiction,” but this is little more than lip-service because the court immediately went on to say (ibid) that the rules of court express the considered view of the Ontario legislature as to what the requirements for jurisdiction ought to be. That view is exactly what cases like Morguard, ibid, and Van Breda, supra note 9, discounted on the basis that the rules, or at least some of them, evidently paid no heed to the need for a real and substantial connection with the province.

⁴⁷ Chevron Corp v Yaiguaje, 2015 SCC 42 at para 49, [2015] 3 SCR 69 [Yaiguaje].

⁴⁸ Eg, the Enforcement of Canadian Judgments and Decrees Act, SBC 2003, c 29, based on a Uniform Law Conference of Canada model act, which was held in Solehdin v Stern Estate, 2014 BCCA 482 (noted in (2014), 52 Can YB Int’l L 603), to authorize the registration of an Ontario judgment in an action on a judgment from Louisiana. The court there distinguished its earlier decision in Owen v Rocketinfo Inc, 2008 BCCA 502, which held that under a different statute the California registration of a Nevada judgment could not be registered as if it were a California judgment.

⁴⁹ Yaiguaje, supra note 47 at para 49.

⁵⁰ Eg, CJPTA (BC), supra note 1, s 6.

⁵¹ Code civil du Québec, LQ 1991, ch 64, art 3136 [CcQ].

⁵² Van Breda, supra note 9.

⁵³ Yaiguaje, supra note 47 at para 73.

⁵⁴ Eg, CJPTA (BC), supra note 1, s 10(k).

⁵⁵ Yaiguaje, supra note 47 at paras 70–72.

⁵⁶ In the United States, the distinction is expressed in terms of “general” versus “specific” jurisdiction.

⁵⁷ Quebec law takes a different view. Article 3148(2) CcQ, supra note 51, says that if the defendant is a legal person that is not domiciled in Quebec but has an establishment in Quebec, jurisdiction exists if “the dispute relates to its activities in Quebec.”

⁵⁸ Yaiguaje, supra note 47 at para 89.

⁵⁹ Leave to appeal to SCC granted, 36602 (11 June 2015).

⁶⁰ Which had granted leave to appeal: Equustek Solutions Ltd. v Jack, 2014 BCCA 295.

⁶¹ CJPTA (BC), supra note 1.

⁶² Ibid, s 1, which says that “proceeding” means “an action, suit, cause, matter, petition proceeding or requisition proceeding and includes a procedure and a preliminary motion.”

⁶³ Equustek Solutions Inc. v Jack, 2015 BCCA 265 at paras 97-99, 396 DLR (4th) 224, leave to appeal to SCC granted, 36602 (11 June 2015) [Equustek].

⁶⁴ Ibid at para 98, referring to Equustek Solutions Inc. v Jack, 2014 BCSC 1063 at paras 96–97.

⁶⁵ Equustek, supra note 63 at para 98.

⁶⁶ Lockwood v China Blue Chemical Ltd, 2015 BCSC 839.

⁶⁷ CJPTA (BC), supra note 1.

⁶⁸ CP Ships Ltd v Icecorp Logistics, 2015 ONSC 6243.

⁶⁹ Babey v Greer, 2015 SKQB 219, 77 CPC (7th) 183.

⁷⁰ Leave to appeal to SCC granted, 36616 (10 March 2016).

⁷¹ Privacy Act, RSBC 1996, c 373, s 3(2).

⁷² ZI Pompey Industrie v ECU-Line NV, 2003 SCC 27, [2003] 1 SCR 450 [Pompey].

⁷³ CJPTA (BC), supra note 1, s 11.

⁷⁴ Douez v Facebook Inc, 2015 BCCA 279 at para 31, 387 DLR (4th) 360, leave to appeal to SCC granted, 36616 (10 March 2016) [Douez], citing Viroforce Systems Inc. v R&D Capital Inc, 2011 BCCA 260 and Preymann v Ayus Technology Corp, 2012 BCCA 30.

⁷⁵ Douez, supra note 74 at para 41.

⁷⁶ Seidel v Telus Communications Inc, 2011 SCC 15, [2011] 1 SCR 531, applying s 3 of the Business Practices and Consumer Protection Act, SBC 2004, to hold ineffective a clause requiring the consumer to go to arbitration in a claim against a supplier when that claim was based on the act.

⁷⁷ Leave to appeal to SCC refused, 36378 (15 October 2015).

⁷⁸ Limitations Act, RSA 2000, c L-12, s 3(1)(a). The Alberta court found that Quadrangle knew about the misappropriation of the Rally shares as of October 2005, so the period expired in October 2007.

⁷⁹ Ibid, s 12. The applicable limitation period in Nova Scotia was six years from the time the wrong was discoverable by the plaintiff.

⁸⁰ Enforcement of Canadian Judgments and Decrees Act, SNS 2001, c 30.

⁸¹ Machado v Catalyst Capital Group Inc, 2015 ONSC 6313 (Master).

⁸² Legge v Young, 2015 ONSC 775, 125 OR (3d) 67.

⁸³ The court cited Prince v ACE Aviation Holdings Inc, 2014 ONCA 285 at para 64, leave to appeal to SCC refused, 35935 (23 October 2014), itself citing Van Breda, supra note 9 at para 112.

⁸⁴ CJPTA (BC), supra note 1, s 11.

⁸⁵ JICO Holdings Ltd v Plante, 2015 SKQB 262.

⁸⁶ Billing v Precisioneering DKG Corp, 2015 BCSC 270.

⁸⁷ CJPTA (BC), supra note 1, s 11.

⁸⁸ Shah v LG Chem Ltd, 2015 ONSC 2628, 125 OR (3d) 773.

⁸⁹ Endean v Canadian Red Cross Society, 2014 BCCA 61, 59 BCLR (5th) 113.

⁹⁰ Parsons v Ontario, 2015 ONCA 158, 318 DLR (4th) 667.

⁹¹ Leave to appeal granted, 35483 (Endean) and 36456 (Parsons) (both 5 November 2015).

⁹² Leave to appeal to SCC refused, 36371 (5 November 2015).

⁹³ Divorce Act, supra note 4, s 3(1).

⁹⁴ Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of Child Abduction, 25 October 1980, 1343 UNTS 89 (entered into force 1 December 1983) [Hague Convention], implemented by the Children’s Law Reform Act, RSO 1990, c C.12, s 46.

⁹⁵ Leave to appeal to SCC refused, 36839 (9 June 2016).

⁹⁶ Children’s Law Reform Act, supra note 94.

⁹⁷ The Court of Appeal noted at paras 34–35 that although Egypt is not a party to the Hague Convention, supra note 94, Canada and Egypt have a bilateral agreement, dated 23 July 1997, on the consular elements of family matters. It applies to children of Canadian or Egyptian Citizens and entered into force on 10 November 1997.

⁹⁸ Children’s Law Reform Act, supra note 94, s 23.

⁹⁹ Ibid, s 22(1)(b).

¹⁰⁰ MJG v PRB, 2015 SKQB 365, 70 RFL (7th) 460.

¹⁰¹ Children’s Law Act, 1997, SS 1997, c C-8.2, s 15.

¹⁰² Kaur v Nagra, 2015 ABQB 29.

¹⁰³ TK v RJHA, 2015 BCCA 8, 380 DLR (4th) 346.

¹⁰⁴ Hague Convention, supra note 94, implemented by the Family Law Act, SBC 2011, c 25, Part 4, Division 8.

¹⁰⁵ JHF v SHFN, 2015 BCSC 349.

¹⁰⁶ Alibhoy v Tabalujan, 2015 BCSC 37.

¹⁰⁷ Nowacki v Nowacki, 2015 ONSC 973.

¹⁰⁸ As required by Van Breda, supra note 9.

¹⁰⁹ Rules of Civil Procedure, supra note 42, r 17.02(b).

¹¹⁰ Ibid, r 17.02(c).

¹¹¹ Park v Myong, 2015 ONSC 2287, 11 ETR (4th) 12.

¹¹² CcQ, supra note 51.

¹¹³ Swissair Swiss Air Transport Co Ltd v Société anonyme Sabena en faillite, 2015 QCCS 3879.

¹¹⁴ Parker c Apotex inc, 2015 QCCS 1210.

¹¹⁵ Loi sur le divorce, supra note 4. L’article 5(2) dit que lorsque des actions en modification entre les même ex-époux concernant le même point sont en cours devant deux tribunaux qui auraient par ailleurs compétence en vertu de l’article 5(1), le tribunal saisi en premier a compétence exclusive pour instruire l’affaire et en décider.

¹¹⁶ Autorisation d’appeler refusée, 2015 QCCA 382.

¹¹⁷ Syndicat canadien de la fonction publique c Syndicat canadien des communications, de l’énergie et du papier, section locale 2013, 2015 QCCA 1392.

¹¹⁸ La Cour d’appel a rejeté la requête de la défenderesse en autorisation de pourvoi : TD Auto Finance Services Inc / Service de financement auto TD inc c Belley, 2015 QCCA 1225.

¹¹⁹ The court cited Interinvest (Bermuda) Ltd v Herzog, 2009 QCCA 1428 at paras 38–40.

¹²⁰ Code of Civil Procedure, CQLR, c C-25.01.

¹²¹ Xela Enterprises Ltd v Castillo, 2015 ONSC 866, 70 CPC (7th) 224, aff’d 2016 ONCA 437.

¹²² Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters (1965), referred to in Rules of Civil Procedure, supra note 42, r 17.05.

¹²³ Bulmer v Nissan Motor Co, 2015 SKCA 16.

¹²⁴ The convention is referred to in Queen’s Bench Rules, Sask Gaz, 21 June 2013, 1370, r 12-12.

¹²⁵ Niemela v Malamas, 2015 BCSC 1024.

¹²⁶ This case was inadvertently omitted from last year’s survey.

¹²⁷ Pro Swing Inc v ELTA Golf Inc, 2006 SCC 52, [2006] 2 SCR 612.

¹²⁸ Continental Casualty Co v Symons Estate, 2015 ONSC 6394, 127 OR (3d) 758.

¹²⁹ The decision at first instance was noted (2013) 51 Can YB Int’l L 612.

¹³⁰ Foreign Judgments Act, RSNB 2011, c 162.

¹³¹ Morguard v Guimond Boats Ltd, 2006 FCA 401.

¹³² Mid-Ohio Imported Car Co v Tri-K Investments Ltd (1995), 129 DLR (4th) 181 (BCCA).

¹³³ GA Racicot Enterprises Ltd v Moore (1979), 26 NBR (2d) 151 (QB).

¹³⁴ Sutcliffe v Sotvedt, 2015 NSSC 194, 362 NSR (2d) 218.

¹³⁵ Art IV(d) of the Convention between Canada and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland Providing for the Reciprocal Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (1984), implemented by the Canada and United Kingdom Reciprocal Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments Act, RSNS 1989, c 52.

¹³⁶ Bank of China v Fan, 2015 BCSC 590.

¹³⁷ Korea Data Systems (USA) Inc v Aamazing Technologies Inc, 2015 ONCA 465, 386 DLR (4th) 746.

¹³⁸ Under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, RSC 1985, c B-3, s 178(1)(d).

¹³⁹ Under the Court Order Enforcement Act, RSBC 1996, c 78, Part 2.

¹⁴⁰ LLS America LLC (Trustee of) v Wilson, 2015 BCSC 441, aff’d 2016 BCCA 122.

¹⁴¹ Sutcliffe v Sotvedt, 2015 NSSC 194, 362 NSR (2d) 218.

¹⁴² Depo Traffic v Vikeda International, 2015 ONSC 999.

¹⁴³ International Commercial Arbitration Act, RSO 1990, c I.9, s 2(1) provides that the Model Law is in force in Ontario.

¹⁴⁴ Karmali v Donorworx Inc, 2015 ABQB 105 (Master).

¹⁴⁵ Trillium Motor World Ltd v General Motors of Canada Ltd, 2015 ONSC 3824.

¹⁴⁶ Arthur Wishart Act (Franchise Disclosure), 2000, SO 2000, c 3.

¹⁴⁷ Leave to appeal to SCC refused, 36696 (21 April 2016).

¹⁴⁸ Zurich Life Insurance Co Ltd v Branco, 2015 SKCA 71 at para 179, [2015] 10 WWR 246.

¹⁴⁹ Beals v Saldanha, 2003 SCC 72 at paras 71–72, 219, [2003] 3 SCR 416 [Beals].

¹⁵⁰ Whiten v Pilot Insurance Co, 2002 SCC 18, [2002] 1 SCR 595.

¹⁵¹ Beals, supra note 149 at para 72.

¹⁵² Business Corporations Act, RSO 1990, c B.16, s 242(1).

¹⁵³ Divorce Act, supra note 4, s 22(1)–(3).

¹⁵⁴ Ibid, s 22(1).

¹⁵⁵ Ibid, s 22(3).