Publication
La Cour suprême du Canada tranche : les cadres ne pourront se syndiquer au Québec
Le 19 avril dernier, la Cour suprême du Canada a rendu une décision fort attendue en matière de syndicalisation des cadres.
Canada | Publication | March 2016
On March 10, 2016, the Supreme Court of Canada granted leave on a second recent case involving jurisdictional issues and the internet: Douez v. Facebook, Inc., 2015 BCCA 279.
Douez involved a BC resident plaintiff who sought to sue Facebook for a breach of privacy arising from the use of her name and her portrait without her consent. The proposed class action suit would be based on a claim that Facebook’s practice of featuring the name and image of individuals in relation to certain advertisements amounted to a breach of s. 3 of BC’s Privacy Act—a statutory cause of action which only applied within BC.
At first instance, the BC Supreme Court concluded that BC was a proper jurisdiction, was not forum non conveniens, and granted certification. However, on appeal that certification was dismissed.
The result on appeal arose from a forum selection clause in the Facebook Terms of Use. Applying the established test from Z.I. Pompey1, the BC Court of Appeal concluded that there was not “strong cause” to decline to enforce the forum selection clause, and therefore stayed the proceeding.
As with the recent leave to appeal granted in the Equustek case, the Douez decision explores an important aspect of court jurisdiction over disputes involving online conduct. Where Equustek examined cases not governed by binding terms of service, Douez will provide some parallel insight into situations where terms of service purport to limit the ability of Canadian courts to address online disputes, particularly where such terms may come into conflict with geographically limited causes of action.
Given the similar jurisdictional issues raised as between Douez and Equustek, and the proximity in time that the cases were granted leave, it is likely that the court will hear and consider both matters together.
1 Z.I. Pompey Industrie v. ECU-Line N.V., 2003 SCC 27
Publication
Le 19 avril dernier, la Cour suprême du Canada a rendu une décision fort attendue en matière de syndicalisation des cadres.
Publication
Le budget 2024 propose d’élargir la portée de certains pouvoirs permettant à l’ARC de demander des renseignements aux contribuables tout en prévoyant de nouvelles conséquences pour les contribuables contrevenants.
Publication
L'impôt minimum de remplacement (IMR) est un impôt sur le revenu additionnel prévu dans la Loi de l’impôt sur le revenu (Canada) (la « Loi ») auquel sont assujettis les particuliers et certaines fiducies qui pourraient autrement avoir recours à certaines déductions et exemptions et à certains crédits pour réduire leur impôt sur le revenu fédéral canadien régulier.
Abonnez-vous et restez à l’affût des nouvelles juridiques, informations et événements les plus récents...
© Norton Rose Fulbright LLP 2023