Fission Uranium Corp. et al. v. Dahrouge et al., [2014] B.C.T.C. Uned. 1214 (SC)
| Jurisdiction | British Columbia |
| Judge | Harris, J. |
| Citation | [2014] B.C.T.C. Uned. 1214 (SC),2014 BCSC 1214,[2014] B.C.T.C. Uned. 1214 |
| Court | Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada) |
| Subject Matter | EQUITY,INJUNCTIONS,PRACTICE |
| Date | 10 January 2014 |
-
- 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
8 practice notes
-
Table of Cases
...v Santos, 2014 BCSC First Western Capital v Taylor, [1980] 6 WWR 69, 20 BCLR 149, 1980 Can LI I 604 (SC) Fission Uranium v Dahrouge, 2014 BCSC 1214 92 7° 20® Fonagy v Oasis Trucking, 2006 SKQB 233 58» 65, 215< 214 Formosa Plastic v Ashok Chauhan (8 October 1998) (High Court of Delhi) 5i Fow......
-
Preservation of Property Rules
...Osooli-Talesh v Emami, 2003 BCSC 1924 at paras 49-51 McKnight v Hutchison, 2011 BCSC 36 at paras 145-46 Fission Uranium v Dahrouge, 2014 BCSC 1214 at para 163 The test for a preservation order differs from the more onerous test for a Mareva order in that the rule 10-1 test does not require ......
-
Trainer v. Tractorhill Sales Ltd., 2018 BCSC 2043
...down by the court in RJR-MacDonald Inc. v. Canada (Attorney General), [1994] 1 S.C.R. 311. See also Fission Uranium Corp. v. Dahrouge, 2014 BCSC 1214 at paras. 164-166. [37] Rule 10-1(1) of the Supreme Court Civil Rules reads as follows: Property that is the subject matter of a proceeding (......
-
Pemberton Music Festival Limited Partnership (Re), 2017 BCSC 2398
...[1995] 20 C.B.R. (N.S.) 229 (Ont. S.C., In Bankruptcy) at para. 17, as are constructive trust claims: Fission Uranium Corp. v. Dahrouge, 2014 BCSC 1214 at para. 122.[72] I conclude that if the ticket sale proceeds are held by the Trustee on a constructive trust, Ticketfly Canada would be en......
Request a trial to view additional results
6 cases
-
Trainer v. Tractorhill Sales Ltd., 2018 BCSC 2043
...down by the court in RJR-MacDonald Inc. v. Canada (Attorney General), [1994] 1 S.C.R. 311. See also Fission Uranium Corp. v. Dahrouge, 2014 BCSC 1214 at paras. 164-166. [37] Rule 10-1(1) of the Supreme Court Civil Rules reads as follows: Property that is the subject matter of a proceeding (......
-
Avidworx Productions Inc. v. Culbertson et al., [2015] B.C.T.C. Uned. 135 (SC)
...[89] The law is well settled regarding the test for an interlocutory injunction. Harris J. in Fission Uranium Corp. v. Dahrouge, 2014 BCSC 1214 stated the test in this fashion: [164] The three-part test for an interlocutory injunction was articulated in RJR-MacDonald . In this province, the......
-
Pemberton Music Festival Limited Partnership (Re), 2017 BCSC 2398
...[1995] 20 C.B.R. (N.S.) 229 (Ont. S.C., In Bankruptcy) at para. 17, as are constructive trust claims: Fission Uranium Corp. v. Dahrouge, 2014 BCSC 1214 at para. 122.[72] I conclude that if the ticket sale proceeds are held by the Trustee on a constructive trust, Ticketfly Canada would be en......
-
Este v. Esteghamat-Ardakani, 2019 BCSC 2214
...for an order to preserve property has been said to be essentially the same as that for an injunction: Fission Uranium Corp. v. Dahrouge, 2014 BCSC 1214. In Kepis & Pobe Financial Group Inc. v. Timis Corporation, 2018 BCCA 420 [Kepis], the test was set out at para. 21 as [21] ......
Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
-
Table of Cases
...v Santos, 2014 BCSC First Western Capital v Taylor, [1980] 6 WWR 69, 20 BCLR 149, 1980 Can LI I 604 (SC) Fission Uranium v Dahrouge, 2014 BCSC 1214 92 7° 20® Fonagy v Oasis Trucking, 2006 SKQB 233 58» 65, 215< 214 Formosa Plastic v Ashok Chauhan (8 October 1998) (High Court of Delhi) 5i Fow......
-
Preservation of Property Rules
...Osooli-Talesh v Emami, 2003 BCSC 1924 at paras 49-51 McKnight v Hutchison, 2011 BCSC 36 at paras 145-46 Fission Uranium v Dahrouge, 2014 BCSC 1214 at para 163 The test for a preservation order differs from the more onerous test for a Mareva order in that the rule 10-1 test does not require ......