Plimmer v. Google, Inc., [2013] B.C.T.C. Uned. 681

JurisdictionBritish Columbia
JudgeGriffin, J.
CourtSupreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
Subject MatterBARRISTERS AND SOLICITORS,PRACTICE
Date18 April 2013
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
6 practice notes
  • No Further Steps in Proceeding - Section 137.1(5)
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Guide to the Law and Practice of Anti-SLAPP Proceedings Part VIII. Procedural Rules
    • 13 de junho de 2022
    ...Fehr was a class action where third party funding approval arose, and as Madam Justice Griin pointed out in Plimmer v. Google, Inc. , 2013 BCSC 681 at paras. 105-106, Fehr was really a case of waiver upon bringing a motion for funding approval. [94] The jurisprudence cautions against diving......
  • IRENE BRECKON ET AL. v CERMAQ CANADA LTD. ET AL., 2024 FC 225
    • Canada
    • Federal Court (Canada)
    • 9 de fevereiro de 2024
    ...a consideration when approving legal fees in the class action context” (Kobe Steel at para 58, referring to Plimmer v Google, Inc, 2013 BCSC 681 and Endean v The Canadian Red Cross Society; Mitchell v CRCS, 2000 BCSC 971, aff’d 2000 BCCA 638, leave to appeal dismissed, [2001] ......
  • Lin v. Airbnb, Inc.,
    • Canada
    • Federal Court (Canada)
    • 19 de novembro de 2021
    ...a consideration when approving legal fees in the class action context” (Kobe Steel at para 58, referring to Plimmer v Google, Inc, 2013 BCSC 681 and Endean v The Canadian Red Cross Society; Mitchell v CRCS, 2000 BCSC 971, aff’d 2000 BCCA 638, leave to appeal dismissed, [2001] ......
  • Kett v. Kobe Steel, Ltd., 2020 BCSC 1977
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • 14 de dezembro de 2020
    ...[58] The integrity of the profession is a consideration when approving legal fees in the class action context: Plimmer v. Google, Inc., 2013 BCSC 681; Endean v. The Canadian Red Cross Society, 2000 BCSC 971, aff’d 2000 BCCA 638, leave to appeal dismissed, [2001] S.C.C.A. No. 27. Counsel oft......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
5 cases
  • IRENE BRECKON ET AL. v CERMAQ CANADA LTD. ET AL., 2024 FC 225
    • Canada
    • Federal Court (Canada)
    • 9 de fevereiro de 2024
    ...a consideration when approving legal fees in the class action context” (Kobe Steel at para 58, referring to Plimmer v Google, Inc, 2013 BCSC 681 and Endean v The Canadian Red Cross Society; Mitchell v CRCS, 2000 BCSC 971, aff’d 2000 BCCA 638, leave to appeal dismissed, [2001] ......
  • Lin v. Airbnb, Inc.,
    • Canada
    • Federal Court (Canada)
    • 19 de novembro de 2021
    ...a consideration when approving legal fees in the class action context” (Kobe Steel at para 58, referring to Plimmer v Google, Inc, 2013 BCSC 681 and Endean v The Canadian Red Cross Society; Mitchell v CRCS, 2000 BCSC 971, aff’d 2000 BCCA 638, leave to appeal dismissed, [2001] ......
  • Cardoso v. Canada Dry Mott’s Inc., 2020 BCSC 1569
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • 23 de outubro de 2020
    ...integrity of the profession and the precedential value of a decision when approving legal fees in this context: Plimmer v. Google, Inc., 2013 BCSC 681 at para. 24, citing Endean. I am concerned that an award whereby counsel receives more than the amount being paid cy-près on behalf of their......
  • Kett v. Kobe Steel, Ltd., 2020 BCSC 1977
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • 14 de dezembro de 2020
    ...[58] The integrity of the profession is a consideration when approving legal fees in the class action context: Plimmer v. Google, Inc., 2013 BCSC 681; Endean v. The Canadian Red Cross Society, 2000 BCSC 971, aff’d 2000 BCCA 638, leave to appeal dismissed, [2001] S.C.C.A. No. 27. Counsel oft......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • No Further Steps in Proceeding - Section 137.1(5)
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Guide to the Law and Practice of Anti-SLAPP Proceedings Part VIII. Procedural Rules
    • 13 de junho de 2022
    ...Fehr was a class action where third party funding approval arose, and as Madam Justice Griin pointed out in Plimmer v. Google, Inc. , 2013 BCSC 681 at paras. 105-106, Fehr was really a case of waiver upon bringing a motion for funding approval. [94] The jurisprudence cautions against diving......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT