Optrics Inc. v Lloyd's Underwriters, 2022 ABCA 26
| Court | Court of Appeal (Alberta) |
| Judge | Khullar,Kirker,Pentelechuk |
| Citation | 2022 ABCA 26 |
| Docket Number | 2003-0218AC |
| Date | 27 January 2022 |
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock 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
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
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
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
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
Start Your 7-day Trial
5 practice notes
-
Shodunke v Alberta
...to the claim, and the responding party that there exists a genuine issue that requires a trial: Optrics Inc v Lloyd's Underwriters, 2022 ABCA 26 at para 67; Composite Technologies Inc v Shawcor Ltd, 2017 ABCA 160 at para 30 Under rule 3.68, the court may strike all or part of a claim or def......
-
Petropoulos v Petropoulos
...palpable error in the assessment of the facts, or an unreasonable exercise of discretion”: Optrics Inc v Lloyd's Underwriters, 2022 ABCA 26 at para IV. Discussion 14 Considering the evidentiary record before the chambers judge and his reasons, this is not an appropriate case to ......
-
Hudye Inc. v Rosowsky
...165 at para 4. Because costs awards are discretionary, they are owed significant deference on appeal: Optrics Inc v Lloyd's Underwriters, 2022 ABCA 26 at para 8 The applicant does not dispute the applicability of Rule 10.41(2)(e) to the fees at issue. Rather, it submits the chambers judge f......
-
Goldstick v Monsma
...error in the assessment of the facts, or an unreasonable exercise of discretion”: Optrics Inc. v Lloyd's Underwriters, 2022 ABCA 26 at para 38. Mr Goldstick's only argument below was that “the costs award punishes a beneficiary for trying to compel a personal represe......
Get Started for Free