Harrison v. XL Foods Inc. et al., [2014] A.R. Uned. 732 (QB)
| Judge | Rooke, J. |
| Court | Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada) |
| Subject Matter | EVIDENCE,PRACTICE |
| Citation | [2014] A.R. Uned. 732 (QB),2014 ABQB 720,[2014] A.R. Uned. 732 |
| Date | 25 November 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
9 practice notes
-
Araya v. Nevsun Resources Ltd, 2017 BCCA 401
...the secondary reports were admissible, “at a minimum to ‘connect the dots’” of otherwise asserted facts, citing Harrison v. XL Foods Inc. 2014 ABQB 720. He continued:A similar conclusion was recently reached in Ewert v. Canada (Attorney General) where Blok J. on a class action certification......
-
Jensen v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.,
...hearsay evidence can be admitted on certification motions (see, e.g., John Doe v R, 2015 FC 236 at paras 7-12; Harrison v XL Foods Inc, 2014 ABQB 720 at paras 24-25). Moreover, evidence that is not tendered for the truth of its contents is not, at this stage of the proceedings, hearsay. Tha......
-
VLM v Dominey,
...and belief and is therefore hearsay. On a certification application such an affidavit is permissible: Harrison v XL Foods Inc, 2014 ABQB 720 at para 18; Cardinal v Alberta, 2020 ABQB 528 at paras 21-22. However, when assessing the evidence in the affidavit it is necessary to con......
-
Pantusa v. Parkland Fuel Corporation,
...It appears the only case that has admitted evidence of the type at issue here is Harrison v. XL Foods Inc., 2014 ABQB 720, although even in that case the scope of admissibility was very narrow. At issue in Harrison was a report of an independent panel appointed by the federal government to ......
Request a trial to view additional results
8 cases
-
Araya v. Nevsun Resources Ltd, 2017 BCCA 401
...the secondary reports were admissible, “at a minimum to ‘connect the dots’” of otherwise asserted facts, citing Harrison v. XL Foods Inc. 2014 ABQB 720. He continued:A similar conclusion was recently reached in Ewert v. Canada (Attorney General) where Blok J. on a class action certification......
-
Jensen v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.,
...hearsay evidence can be admitted on certification motions (see, e.g., John Doe v R, 2015 FC 236 at paras 7-12; Harrison v XL Foods Inc, 2014 ABQB 720 at paras 24-25). Moreover, evidence that is not tendered for the truth of its contents is not, at this stage of the proceedings, hearsay. Tha......
-
VLM v Dominey,
...and belief and is therefore hearsay. On a certification application such an affidavit is permissible: Harrison v XL Foods Inc, 2014 ABQB 720 at para 18; Cardinal v Alberta, 2020 ABQB 528 at paras 21-22. However, when assessing the evidence in the affidavit it is necessary to con......
-
Pantusa v. Parkland Fuel Corporation,
...It appears the only case that has admitted evidence of the type at issue here is Harrison v. XL Foods Inc., 2014 ABQB 720, although even in that case the scope of admissibility was very narrow. At issue in Harrison was a report of an independent panel appointed by the federal government to ......
Request a trial to view additional results
1 firm's commentaries
-
Product Recalls: Determining If You're Affected And If You Have A Legal Claim
...the same item without a risk of harm.4 Footnotes 1 Johansson v General Motors of Canada Ltd, 2012 NSCA 120 2 Harrison v XL Foods, 2014 ABQB 720 3 Dube v Labar, [1986] 1 SCR 649 4 Nicholson v John Deere Ltd, 1986 CanLII 2502 (ON SC) The content of this article is intended to provide a genera......