Volume 10 • Number 2d • March 3RD, 2003

Index by date

|

 

NEW
  in Company Law

1

Action to recover advances made personally to the sole director/shareholder of a company. Granted.

Résidences de Longueuil, s.e.n.c. v. Chabot. Superior Court. 505-17-000875-007. 5 December 2002. Honourable Justice Durocher.

2

Motion for dismissal alleging good faith and that the majority shareholder acted without authority so it cannot be used against the petitioner. Granted.

Jean St-Jacques et Marguerite St-Jacques v. Zbiegniew Hauderrowicz and 4000986 Canada Inc. and 3884490 Canada Inc. et als. Superior Court. 550-05-012320-027. 11 December 2002. Honourable Justice Bédard. 

3

Motion for dismissal on the grounds of prescription according to Section 119(2) of the Canada Business Corporations Act and for lack of privity. Granted in part.

Éric Laurent v. 3104-0769 Québec Inc., France Morin and Novexcel Inc. Superior Court. 540-17-000858-026. 12 December 2002. Honourable Justice Côté.

4

Action against an insurance company that refuses to pay the indemnity provided in the insurance policy alleging bad faith from the insured. Dismissed.

2548-8297 Québec Inc. c. La Compagnie d’assurance Missisquoi. Superior Court. 455-05-000034-939. 16 December 2002. Honourable Justice Mireault.

5

Motion for Declaratory judgment to declare section 104.1 of the Competition Act inoperative by reason of its incompatibility with the Canadian Bill of Rights. Granted.

Air Canada v. Attorney General of Canada and the Commissioner of Competition. Court of Appeal. 500-09-011298-015. 16 January 2003. Honourable Justices Rothman, Delisle, Rochon.

6

Appeal of a decision granting a motion for dismissal based on the lack of privity between the petitioners and the respondent. Granted.

ProMetic Sciences de la Vie Inc. and ProMetic Bioscience Inc. v. Monogel AB. Court of Appeal. 500-09-010592-012. 7 January 2003. Honourable Justices Rothman, Dussault, Delisle.

7

Appeal of a decision pursuant to section 190 of the Canadian Business Corporations Act that determined the fair market value of shares owned by a shareholder. Granted in part.

La Société immobilière 1234 de la Montagne Ltée v. James A. Ioanidis. Court of Appeal. 500-09-009324-005. 19 December 2002. Honourable Justices Beauregard, Mailhot, Rayle.

8

Claim against the jointly and severally guarantee and former shareholder for the balance due on a loan. Granted.

Banque Laurentienne du Canada v. Ghislain Lafontaine. Superior Court. 615-17-000091-008. 16 December 2002. Honourable Justice Viens.

 
1

Higher life forms are not patentable because they are not a "manufacture" or "composition of matter" within the meaning of the Patent Act.

Harvard College v. Canada (Commissioner of Patents). Supreme Court of Canada. 2002 SCC 76. File no. 28155. December 5, 2002. Honourable Justices McLachlin, L’Heureux-Dubé, Gonthier, Iacobucci, Major, Bastarache, Binnie, Arbour and LeBel.

2

Appeal of a decision from the Federal Court condemning two corporations for infringement of the trade-mark "Pharsyde". Dismissed.

Farside Clothing Ltd. and Farside Skateboards & Snowboards Ltd. v. Caricline Ventures Ltd. Federal Court of Appeal. 2002 FCA 446. Docket A-2-02. 12 November 2002. Honourable Justices Evans, Strayer, Nadon.

3

The Complainant opposes the registration of the domain names "discounthydroponics.com". Denied.

Roberta Chiappetta dba Discount Hydroponics v. C.J. Morales. WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center. Administrative Panel Decision. Case no. D2002-1103. 20 January 2003.

4

The domain names "canadiantiredealer.com" and "canadiantiredealers.com" are transferred to the Complainant Canadian Tire.

Canadian Tire Corporation Ltd. v. Mike Rollo. WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center. Administrative Panel Decision. Case no. D2002-1069. 14 January 2003.