Berlinic v. Peace Hills General Insurance Co. et al., 2016 ABQB 104
| Court | Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada) |
| Case Date | February 24, 2016 |
| Citations | 2016 ABQB 104 |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
6 practice notes
-
Altex International Heat Exchanger Ltd v Foster Wheeler Limited, 2018 ABQB 620
...and certainly no later than 2009, did not significantly advance the action. [115] In Berlinic v Peace Hills General Insurance Company, 2016 ABQB 104, the Court held that “[a] supplemental Affidavit of Records, simply listing additional documents already provided is usually (as here) just ho......
-
Baron Real Estate Investments Ltd v Tri-Arrow Industrial Recovery Inc.,
...2018 ABQB 597; XS Technologies Inc v Veritas DGC Land Ltd, 2016 ABCA 165; and Berlinic v Peace Hills General Insurance Company, 2016 ABQB 104. 39 It was Mr. Slawsky's testimony that he received the Starchuk Supplied Records (7095-10625), incrementally, between July 2016 and December 20......
-
Relevant & Substantial Undertaking Responses Might Qualify As Litigation Steps
...undertakings matter, not the requests for undertakings. The Court emphasized (as stated in Berlinic v Peace Hills General Insurance Co, 2016 ABQB 104) when determining relevance and materiality of a given undertaking response, one must start with the pleadings. In this case, nothing in the ......
-
Relevant & Substantial Undertaking Responses Might Qualify As Litigation Steps
...undertakings matter, not the requests for undertakings. The Court emphasized (as stated in Berlinic v Peace Hills General Insurance Co, 2016 ABQB 104) when determining relevance and materiality of a given undertaking response, one must start with the pleadings. In this case, nothing in the ......
Request a trial to view additional results
3 cases
-
Altex International Heat Exchanger Ltd v Foster Wheeler Limited, 2018 ABQB 620
...and certainly no later than 2009, did not significantly advance the action. [115] In Berlinic v Peace Hills General Insurance Company, 2016 ABQB 104, the Court held that “[a] supplemental Affidavit of Records, simply listing additional documents already provided is usually (as here) just ho......
-
Baron Real Estate Investments Ltd v Tri-Arrow Industrial Recovery Inc.,
...2018 ABQB 597; XS Technologies Inc v Veritas DGC Land Ltd, 2016 ABCA 165; and Berlinic v Peace Hills General Insurance Company, 2016 ABQB 104. 39 It was Mr. Slawsky's testimony that he received the Starchuk Supplied Records (7095-10625), incrementally, between July 2016 and December 20......
-
Stringam Denecky LLP v Sun Media Corporation, 2016 ABQB 692
...Society v Hamilton (City), 2008 ONCA 182. By the Court M (A) v Ryan, [1997] 1 SCR 157; Berlinic v Peace Hills General Insurance Company, 2016 ABQB 104 (at para 18 and Lougheed Estate v Wilson, 2012 BCCA 181. Facts The Plaintiff represented a client in a family law matter. It involved a diff......
3 firm's commentaries
-
Relevant & Substantial Undertaking Responses Might Qualify As Litigation Steps
...undertakings matter, not the requests for undertakings. The Court emphasized (as stated in Berlinic v Peace Hills General Insurance Co, 2016 ABQB 104) when determining relevance and materiality of a given undertaking response, one must start with the pleadings. In this case, nothing in the ......
-
Relevant & Substantial Undertaking Responses Might Qualify As Litigation Steps
...undertakings matter, not the requests for undertakings. The Court emphasized (as stated in Berlinic v Peace Hills General Insurance Co, 2016 ABQB 104) when determining relevance and materiality of a given undertaking response, one must start with the pleadings. In this case, nothing in the ......
-
Defence & Indemnity December 2016
...significant advance in the action and the new 3-year drop dead Rule applies retroactively. Berlinic v. Peace Hills General Insurance Co., 2016 ABQB 104, per Schlosser, Master Read More B. The Plaintiff did not show a "want of diligence" in failing to take any proactive steps in discovering ......