Cupola v Remai

JurisdictionSaskatchewan
JudgeD.B. KONKIN
CourtCourt of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
Citation2016 SKQB 359
Date31 October 2016

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

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

vLex

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

vLex

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

vLex

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

vLex

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

vLex

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

vLex
3 practice notes
  • Saskatchewan Power Corporation v Mitsubishi Power Canada Ltd.,
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
    • June 17, 2022
    ...the negligence claims and cross claims against Flenco and Garbarino, as the lex loci dilecti. See also: Cupola Investments Inc. v Remai, 2016 SKQB 359 at para 49, citing Tolofson v Jensen; Lucas (Litigation Guardian of) v Gagnon, [1994] 3 SCR 1022 (SCC). Saskatchewan law will also apply to ......
  • ROMANCHUK v. JEMI FIBRE CORP.,
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
    • February 2, 2018
    ...court that the alternative jurisdiction is clearly the more appropriate forum to try these actions: see Cupola Investments Inc. v Remai, 2016 SKQB 359 at paras 15 and 16 [Cupola], and Canada Life Assurance Co. v Holidair Insurance Services Ltd., 2011 SKQB 194 at para 11, 374 Sask R 128, aff......
  • Blonde Ambition Investments Inc. v Rjm Ventures LLC,
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
    • October 16, 2019
    ...Corp 2018 SKQB 46 the Court reiterated Konkin J description of the standard of proof in the case of Cupola Investments Inc. V. Remai 2016 SKQB 359 at para 15 and 16 which states as 16  The standard of proof required is to demonstrate that a court of an alternative jurisdiction is ......
3 cases
  • Saskatchewan Power Corporation v Mitsubishi Power Canada Ltd.,
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
    • June 17, 2022
    ...the negligence claims and cross claims against Flenco and Garbarino, as the lex loci dilecti. See also: Cupola Investments Inc. v Remai, 2016 SKQB 359 at para 49, citing Tolofson v Jensen; Lucas (Litigation Guardian of) v Gagnon, [1994] 3 SCR 1022 (SCC). Saskatchewan law will also apply to ......
  • ROMANCHUK v. JEMI FIBRE CORP.,
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
    • February 2, 2018
    ...court that the alternative jurisdiction is clearly the more appropriate forum to try these actions: see Cupola Investments Inc. v Remai, 2016 SKQB 359 at paras 15 and 16 [Cupola], and Canada Life Assurance Co. v Holidair Insurance Services Ltd., 2011 SKQB 194 at para 11, 374 Sask R 128, aff......
  • Blonde Ambition Investments Inc. v Rjm Ventures LLC,
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
    • October 16, 2019
    ...Corp 2018 SKQB 46 the Court reiterated Konkin J description of the standard of proof in the case of Cupola Investments Inc. V. Remai 2016 SKQB 359 at para 15 and 16 which states as 16  The standard of proof required is to demonstrate that a court of an alternative jurisdiction is ......