Areas of Law
Content Type
Find by author/faculty...
  • This paper was drawn from materials presented at The Rules of Court Interpreted program in November 2011. Learn how the Foundational Rules provide interpretation guidelines, as well as guidance as to the scope of relief and remedies the Court can provide. This comprehensive paper cites dozens of relevant cases, and highlights material changes under the new Alberta Rules of Court.  
  • $545.00
    The Alberta Civil Practice Manual contains comprehensive information vital to your civil litigation practice. Packed with background information and commentary written by leading civil law practitioners, this manual contains valuable information to get you through a litigation file from start to finish, including topics on commencing an action, questioning, managing litigation, trial, and judgments and orders.
  • $45.00
    This paper focuses on significant tort law cases in the Supreme Court of Canada and the Alberta Court of Appeal since 2009 including discussions on: (1) defamation, (2) negligence and the duty of care, (3) negligence and the standard of care, (4) negligence and breach of statute, (5) negligence and causation, (6) negligent misrepresentation, (7) malicious prosecution, (8) tort damages, (9) tort procedure, (10) fatal accidents, (11) occupiers' liability, and (12) constitutional actions. This paper was presented at the Update 2011 program.
  • The interface between trust law and bankruptcy and insolvency law has generated both legislation and litigation. An aspect of this interface is the constitutional division of power: trust law falls within provincial legislative jurisdiction, whereas bankruptcy is a matter of federal legislation. This paper explores the conceptual factors that have been applied by courts when determining the appropriate accommodation between trust and insolvency law. This accommodation is addressed in the context of six categories of trusts: express trusts, implied trusts, remedial trusts, resulting trusts, deemed statutory trusts, and trusts mandated by statute benefitting the Crown or others. This paper is part of a collection presented at LESA’s 2016 The Constitution in the Insolvency Tool Box program.
  • Determining the purpose and objectives of long-standing and established federal insolvency systems has generally not been difficult. The same cannot be said for federal receivership provisions. The Supreme Court of Canada undertook a search for the purpose behind these federal receivership provisions in Saskatchewan (Attorney General) v Lemare Lake Logging Ltd, 2015 SCC 53. That case, which has cast doubt on whether receivership law should be characterized as a federal insolvency system, serves as the central focus of this paper. The author seeks to explain how and why this questioning of receivership law has come to pass, and considers its future implications. This paper is part of a collection presented at LESA’s 2016 The Constitution in the Insolvency Tool Box program.
  • Regulatory bodies are becoming increasingly involved in the sale and liquidation of an insolvent oil and gas corporation’s assets. This paper discusses the enforcement of regulatory powers in an insolvency, with a particular focus on the recent case of Re Redwater Energy Corporation, 2016 ABQB 278, discussing arguments raised in the case and the Alberta Energy Regulator’s position on them. As well, recent decisions from the Alberta Surface Rights Board are also commented on to highlight the difficulty regulators are having when faced with constitutional questions stemming from an insolvency. This paper is part of a collection presented at LESA’s 2016 The Constitution in the Insolvency Tool Box program.
  • Recent case law has considered the extent of insolvency legislation’s rehabilitative power. This paper examines the impact of recent decisions from the Supreme Court of Canada, suggesting that an individual found guilty of professional misconduct can likely avoid fines and costs imposed by a professional regulatory body by making use of insolvency proceedings. Key cases are outlined in the author’s analysis: 407 ETR Concession Co v Canada (Superintendent of Bankruptcy), 2015 SCC 52; Alberta (Attorney General) v Moloney, 2015 SCC 51; KPMG Inc v Alberta Dental Association, 2005 ABCA 101. Further, limitations imposed by the legal system on the degree to which insolvency can impede a professional regulator’s powers are discussed, with consideration given to internal mechanisms in insolvency law, as well as the constitutional division of powers. This paper is part of a collection presented at LESA’s 2015 The Constitution in the Insolvency Tool Box program.
  • Canadian courts often have to consider the interplay between federal insolvency laws and provincial property and civil rights laws. This paper outlines the various “points of contact” between federal and provincial laws and what courts have concluded about the co-existence of those laws through an examination of past and current case law. Topics discussed include priorities, the scope of and test for provable claims, claims against third parties, trustee powers, and Charter of Rights and Freedoms cases in insolvency law. This paper is part of a collection presented at LESA’s 2016 The Constitution in the Insolvency Tool Box program.
  • This paper discusses jurisdiction considerations in litigation. It provides a background discussion on determining jurisdiction, including the real and substantial connection test and other factors considered by the court. It also reviews civil litigation procedural differences between Canada and the United States, including terminology, service of documents, letters rogatory, discovery rules, security for costs, undertakings, trials, and courtroom etiquette. Additionally, procedural differences between Alberta and other Canadian provinces, particularly Ontario and British Columbia, are also highlighted. Issues discussed include starting and defending a claim, special litigation rules, Ontario Simplified Procedure, mediation, service deadlines, disclosure and discovery, and costs. This paper is part of a collection presented at LESA’s Managing a Litigation Practice program held in Edmonton on November 24, 2016 and in Calgary on December 1, 2016.