Alberta v Cox, 2017 ABCA 5
| Court | Court of Appeal (Alberta) |
| Judge | The Honourable Chief Justice Catherine Fraser,The Honourable Madam Justice Marina Paperny,The Honourable Madam Justice Sheila Greckol |
| Citation | 2017 ABCA 5 |
| Date | 10 January 2017 |
| Docket Number | 1403-0284-AC; 1403-0285-AC |
| Subject Matter | CRIMINAL LAW |
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Start Your 7-day Trial
11 practice notes
-
H2 Canmore Apartments LP v. Cormode & Dickson Construction Edmonton Ltd.
...to the representee in the sense that damages resulted: Giustini at para 36, citing Queen v Cognos Inc, 1993 CanLII 146; Alberta v Cox, 2017 ABCA 5 at para 67. The duty of care analysis involves considering both proximity and foreseeability, with the former requiring a consideration of the d......
-
Armstrong v. Gula
...the representee in the sense that damages resulted: Giustini at para 36, citing Queen v Cognos Inc, 1993 CanLII 146 (SCC); Alberta v Cox, 2017 ABCA 5 at para 67. The duty of care analysis involves considering both proximity and foreseeability, with the former requiring a consideration the d......
-
Jones v Temple Real Estate Investment Trust
...is “whether the reliance was reasonable having regard to all the circumstances known to and affecting both parties”: Alberta v Cox, 2017 ABCA 5 at para 69, citing from Keith Plumbing & Heating Co v Newport City Club Ltd, 2000 BCCA 141 at para 102. [193] In the context of this case, the ......
-
Giustini v Workman
...that damages resulted. The essential elements of a negligent misrepresentation claim listed in Cognos remain the same: Alberta v Cox, 2017 ABCA 5, para 67. “The fundamental question is ‘whether the reliance was reasonable having regard to all of the circumstances known to and affecting both......
Get Started for Free
9 cases
-
H2 Canmore Apartments LP v. Cormode & Dickson Construction Edmonton Ltd.
...to the representee in the sense that damages resulted: Giustini at para 36, citing Queen v Cognos Inc, 1993 CanLII 146; Alberta v Cox, 2017 ABCA 5 at para 67. The duty of care analysis involves considering both proximity and foreseeability, with the former requiring a consideration of the d......
-
Armstrong v. Gula
...the representee in the sense that damages resulted: Giustini at para 36, citing Queen v Cognos Inc, 1993 CanLII 146 (SCC); Alberta v Cox, 2017 ABCA 5 at para 67. The duty of care analysis involves considering both proximity and foreseeability, with the former requiring a consideration the d......
-
Giustini v Workman
...that damages resulted. The essential elements of a negligent misrepresentation claim listed in Cognos remain the same: Alberta v Cox, 2017 ABCA 5, para 67. “The fundamental question is ‘whether the reliance was reasonable having regard to all of the circumstances known to and affecting both......
-
Landry v. Aurora Cannabis Inc
...his reliance must have been detrimental to the representee causing him damage (Queen v Cognos Inc, [1993] 1 SCR 87 at 110; Alberta v Cox, 2017 ABCA 5 at para [50] It is not plain or obvious to me that the Plaintiffs’ claim of common law negligent misrepresentation cannot succeed. Their Amen......
Get Started for Free
