Jin v. Ren, 2016 ABCA 80

JudgeBerger, Veldhuis and Schutz, JJ.A.
CourtCourt of Appeal (Alberta)
Case DateTuesday March 22, 2016
JurisdictionAlberta
Citations2016 ABCA 80;[2016] A.R. Uned. 45;[2016] A.R. Uned. 45 (CA)

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
4 practice notes
  • Dow Chemical Canada ULC v NOVA Chemicals Corporation
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
    • June 20, 2018
    ...ABCA 20; 1081748 Alberta Ltd v Enervest Resource Management Ltd, 2008 ABQB 793 at paras 62-67; Jin v Ren, 2015 ABQB 115 at para 108, aff’d 2016 ABCA 80, leave to appeal to SCC refused 37023 (October 13, 2016); Alpine Canada Alpin v Non-Marine Underwriters, 1999 ABQB 454 at para [1178] In ne......
  • R. v Gardiner, 2018 ABCA 298
    • Canada
    • Alberta Court of Appeal (Alberta)
    • September 14, 2018
    ...as here; see R v Dinardo, 2008 SCC 24 at para 32, [2008] 1 SCR 788; R v REM, 2008 SCC 51 at paras 24-25, [2008] 2 SCR 3 [REM]; R v Walsh, 2016 ABCA 80 at paras 11, 24-25. In such a case, a trial judge’s decision cannot be faulted simply for failing to recite each of these factors, and the n......
  • Hugo v Ewashko, 2022 ABCA 110
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Alberta)
    • March 29, 2022
    ...[29]        Third, issues related to trial fairness generally raise questions of law: Ren v Jin, 2016 ABCA 80 at para 27. This is the case irrespective of whether the decision was discretionary; discretionary powers must always be exercised judicially and ......
  • Hansen v White, 2021 ABPC 187
    • Canada
    • Provincial Court of Alberta (Canada)
    • June 28, 2021
    ...be more convenient. [39]        Mr. Gilroy relied on the decisions in Jin v Ren, 2015 ABQB 115, (affd. 2016 ABCA 80) (Jin v Ren), where the Court held that the arrangement between the parties was so vague and uncertain no contract could be said to have eve......
4 cases
  • Dow Chemical Canada ULC v NOVA Chemicals Corporation,
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
    • June 20, 2018
    ...ABCA 20; 1081748 Alberta Ltd v Enervest Resource Management Ltd, 2008 ABQB 793 at paras 62-67; Jin v Ren, 2015 ABQB 115 at para 108, aff’d 2016 ABCA 80, leave to appeal to SCC refused 37023 (October 13, 2016); Alpine Canada Alpin v Non-Marine Underwriters, 1999 ABQB 454 at para [1178] In ne......
  • R. v Gardiner, 2018 ABCA 298
    • Canada
    • Alberta Court of Appeal (Alberta)
    • September 14, 2018
    ...as here; see R v Dinardo, 2008 SCC 24 at para 32, [2008] 1 SCR 788; R v REM, 2008 SCC 51 at paras 24-25, [2008] 2 SCR 3 [REM]; R v Walsh, 2016 ABCA 80 at paras 11, 24-25. In such a case, a trial judge’s decision cannot be faulted simply for failing to recite each of these factors, and the n......
  • Hugo v Ewashko, 2022 ABCA 110
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Alberta)
    • March 29, 2022
    ...[29]        Third, issues related to trial fairness generally raise questions of law: Ren v Jin, 2016 ABCA 80 at para 27. This is the case irrespective of whether the decision was discretionary; discretionary powers must always be exercised judicially and ......
  • Hansen v White, 2021 ABPC 187
    • Canada
    • Provincial Court of Alberta (Canada)
    • June 28, 2021
    ...be more convenient. [39]        Mr. Gilroy relied on the decisions in Jin v Ren, 2015 ABQB 115, (affd. 2016 ABCA 80) (Jin v Ren), where the Court held that the arrangement between the parties was so vague and uncertain no contract could be said to have eve......