Sup Ct

Sup. Ct.

1. Superior Court.
2. Supreme Court.
References in periodicals archive ?
65) Six cases included female consumers, individually or as class representatives: Allen Sup Ct, supra note 62; Berube, supra note 62; Friesen, supra note 62; McLean, supra note 62; Liebrecht, supra note 62; Trepanier, supra note 62; and Douez SC, supra note 62.
72) These cases included the following jurisdictions: the United States (Trepanier, supra note 62; Rudder, supra note 62; Friesen, supra note 62; Ezer, supra note 62; Zhan, supra note 62; Allen Sup Ct, supra note 62; Magill, supra note 62; Douez SC, supra note 62), Switzerland (Lehner, supra note 62), Germany (Liebrecht, supra note 62), England (Rosenthal, supra note 62), the Isle of Man (Berube, supra note 62), and India (Stephen, supra note 62).
76) See Rudder, supra note 62; Lehner, supra note 62; Kates, supra note 62; Ezer, supra note 62; Zhan, supra note 62; Allen Sup Ct, supra note 62; Berube, supra note 62; Liebrecht, supra note 62; Stephen, supra note 62; Manjos, supra note 62; Douez SC, supra note 62; Preymann SC, supra note 62.
106) See Rudder, supra note 62; Kates, supra note 62; Ezer, supra note 62; Zhan, supra note 62; Allen Sup Ct, supra note 62; Berube, supra note 62; Liebrecht, supra note 62; Preymann CA, supra note 62 at para 46; Douez CA, supra note 62 at para 80; Manjos, supra note 62.
See also Edward M Iacobucci & Kevin E Davis, "Reconciling Derivative Claims and the Oppression Remedy" (2000) 12 Sup Ct L Rev (2d) 87.
See Donnelly v United Technologies Corp (2008), 66 CPC (6th) 1 at para 12, 168 ACWS (3d) 290 (Ont Sup Ct J); Glover v City of Toronto & HMQ, 2014 ONSC 305 at para 32, 238 ACWS (3d) 850.
See also Elliott v Boliden Ltd (2006), 34 CPC (6th) 339 at para 42, 151 ACWS (3d) 1011 (Ont Sup Ct J); Toronto Community Housing Corp v Thyssenkrupp Elevator (Canada) Ltd, 2012 ONSC 6626 at para 52, 44 CPC (7th) 361 [Thyssenkrupp]; Markson v MBNA Canada Bank, 2012 ONSC 5891 at para 59, 42 CPC (7th) 202 [Markson]; Bilodeau v Maple Leaf Food Inc, [2009] OJ No 1006 (QL) at para 94, 175 ACWS (3d) 333 (Sup Ct J) [Bilodeau]; Helm v Toronto Hydro-Electric System Ltd, 2012 ONSC 2602 at para 30, 40 CPC (7th) 310 [Helm]; Robinson v Rochester Financial Ltd, 2012 ONSC 911 at para 43, 212 ACWS (3d) 20 [Robinson]; Baker Estate, supra note 1 at paras 93, 95; Bellaire v Daya (2007), 49 CPC (6th) 110 at para 70, 162 ACWS (3d) 371 (Ont Sup Ct J) [Bellaire].
See Farkas v Sunnybrook & Women's College Health Sciences Centre (2009), 82 CPC (6th) 222 at para 69, 179 ACWS (3d) 764 (Ont Sup Ct J) [Farkas]; Parsons SC, supra note 8 at para 12; Baker Estate, supra note 1 at para 92.
We are looking at some new Sup Ct justices, permanent overhaul of the health care system, and, thanks to you, we've re-elected Jimmy Carter.
Homebuilder Inc v Man-Sonic Industries Inc (1987), 22 CPC (2d) 39, 5 ACWS (3d) 381 (Ont Sup Ct J); Zidaric v Toshiba of Canada Ltd (2000), 5 CCLT (3d) 61 at para 14, 101 ACWS (3d) 722 (Ont Sup Ct J) [Zidaric]; Amertek Inc v Canadian Commercial Corp (2003), 229 DLR (4th) 419 at paras 369-70, 124 ACWS (3d) (Ont Sup Ct J) [Amertek Sup Ct J].
173 ACWS (3d) 1251, 2009 CanLII 1807 at para 218 (Ont Sup Ct J).
2004), 72 OR (3d) 296, 49 CPC (5th) 283 (Sup Ct J) [Serhan Sup Ct J cited to OR].