Your search

"Solicitor-Client Privilege is the only Canadian textbook of its kind to explain key aspects of lawyer-client confidentiality. With a Foreword written by former Supreme Court of Canada justice Ian Binnie, this distinctly Canadian law textbook analyzes the exceptions to privilege, conditions where privilege is unclear, and situations of competing interests that might bring into question the application of privilege. Especially useful is the examination of privilege in specific contexts, such as in civil litigation, administrative law, corporate settings, and government. Portable and immediately accessible, this useful hardcover book gives lawyers the answers they quickly need, and assurances as to when they can rely on solicitor-client privilege and when they can challenge it."--Publisher's description.

Disclaimer: This summary was generated by AI based on the content of the source document.

In recent years Chambers, Smith, McFarlane and Stevens have all sought to explain the nature of equitable proprietary rights by way of the concept of a ‘right to (or ‘in’, or ‘against’) a right’. In this paper I argue that there is a sense in which this conceptualisation of the beneficiary’s equitable proprietary under a trust is illuminating, but that, rather than a right to the trustee’s possessory interest in tangible property, the ‘rights’ of the trustee in which the beneficiary is interested are the trustee’s powers of title. I also contend, in a ‘fusionist’ spirit, that equitable property interests should not be treated as a particular ‘legal kind’, but rather that only interests under trusts should be regarded as a distinct sort of property interest within the numerus clausas. I go on to show how the proposed analysis best explains (1) our notion of ‘beneficial interest’ under a trust; (2) why a trustee is not a residual claimant to the trust assets; (3) the interest of a discretionary object of a trust; (4) the rules of and rationale for tracing; and (5) the ‘automatic’ resulting trust.

"In recent years, trust law has continued to expand its influence at a rapid pace, particularly in the area of pension trusts, where it plays a key role in resolving conflicts over the administration, creation, termination, and revocation of pension funds. The flexible nature of trusts results in its continued development, especially in the areas of resulting and constructive trusts. This new edition offers substantially revised chapters on both types of trust, as well as many more caselaw references. Chapter 6 explores the various situations in which a resulting trust can arise, examines the important role of intention in finding a resulting trust, and analyzes recent pronouncements by the Supreme Court on the presumptions of resulting trust and advancement. Chapter 7 offers an updated discussion of the constructive trust, which courts increasingly employ as a tool for remedying unjust enrichment in cohabitation cases."--Pub. desc.

A review of recent jurisprudence and doctrine points to the emergence of a new category of contractual obligation : the essential obligation. An array of texts, more numerous in France than in Québec, highlights and attempts to define the notion. Nevertheless, because of the quantitative and qualitative importance of the elements that characterize each proposed doctrinal definition, none is truly satisfactory. We have no choice but to admit that the number of concerns and criticisms raised in connection with the notion make it difficult to circumscribe its actual meaning. In this article, after setting out some doctrinal definitions and the main uncertainties surrounding the notion, we will try to uncover its true meaning by reviewing the ways in which it is used. We will show that the essential obligation has earned a place in the increasingly broad and specialized set of restrictions on contractual freedom.

Disclaimer: This summary was generated by AI based on the content of the source document.

In AB v. Bragg, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that fifteen-year-old AB should be allowed to use a pseudonym in seeking an order to disclose the identity of her online attacker. By framing the case as one pitting the privacy interests of a youthful victim of sexualized online bullying against principles protecting the free press and open courts, the SCC approached but ultimately skirted the central issue of equality. Without undermining the important precedent that AB achieved for youthful targets of online sexualized bullying, the author explores the case as a missed opportunity to examine the discriminatory tropes and structural inequalities that undergird the power of this kind of bullying. Viewed through an equality lens, enhanced access to pseudonymity for targets is not necessarily about privacy per se, but rather an interim measure to respond to the equality-undermining effects of sexualized online bullying—a privacy mechanism in service of equality.

Disclaimer: This summary was generated by AI based on the content of the source document.

Aggressive international tax planning by multinational corporations has lately fallen under intense political scrutiny. U.S. politicians have called out some American multinationals, including Apple, Amazon, Starbucks and Google, for relocating profits abroad to avoid American taxes. More recently, politicians accused Burger King of being unpatriotic for its own purported “tax inversion” maneuver, in which it would acquire Canada’s Tim Hortons and shift the head office from Florida to Ontario, benefitting from the lower northern tax rates. The Chicago-based Walgreens pharmacy chain recently backed off a “tax inversion” plan to relocate to Switzerland (the former headquarters of Alliance Boots, a company acquired by Walgreens), apparently having assessed the political risk as too high. This sort of aggressive international tax planning by multinational corporations was what G20 members had committed to fighting against when they endorsed the OECD’s “action plan” against base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS). Canada has been vigilant about improving its tax framework to prevent non-resident corporations from eroding the Canadian tax base, having enacted thin-capitalization rules and, more recently, foreign-affiliate-dumping rules, as well as proposing anti-treaty-shopping measures. But despite Canada’s commitment to the OECD’s BEPS Action Plan, the Canadian government has been reluctant to follow through on implementing rules that might affect its own resident corporations and their international competitiveness. This is most notably visible in the generous participation exemption for dividends from foreign affiliates, the absence of rules restricting the deductibility of interest expenses incurred to earn exempt dividends from foreign affiliates. Canada may be reluctant to fully follow through on all aspects of the OECD’s BEPS Action Plan. As the examples of Apple, Amazon, Google and Starbucks demonstrate, the American government has so far been unable to bring itself to take any meaningful action against aggressive international planning by U.S.resident corporations. Were Canada to enact and enforce rules that clamped down on aggressive international tax planning by its own resident corporations, it would only put Canadian firms at a competitive disadvantage relative to American (or other international) rivals. Until the United States is willing and able to take the lead on aggressive international tax planning by multi-national corporations, the reality is that smaller countries, including Canada, should be cautious about making changes to its international tax rules that are dependent on other countries making similar changes.

Disclaimer: This summary was generated by AI based on the content of the source document.

Royal prerogative of mercy : ministerial guidelines | WorldCat.org