Sharifpour v. Rostami, 2018 BCCA 458

JurisdictionBritish Columbia
JudgeSavage
Citation2018 BCCA 458
Date29 November 2018
CourtCourt of Appeal (British Columbia)
Docket NumberCA45340, CA45341
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
7 practice notes
  • Table of Cases
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Child Support Guidelines in Canada, 2022
    • July 27, 2022
    ...300, 301 Sharifpour v Rostami, 2018 BCCA 458................................................................................................................... 606 Sharma v Sharma, 2022 MBQB 27.........................................................................................34, 35, 4......
  • Evidence; Procedure; Costs
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Child Support Guidelines in Canada, 2022
    • July 27, 2022
    ...v National Dental Examining Board, 2019 ABQB 283 at paras 817–20. 176 See Vavrek v Vavrek, 2019 ABCA 235. And see Sharifpour v Rostami, 2018 BCCA 458, wherein it was held that the jurisdiction to grant a stay pending appeal lies with the court that made the 177 F(E) v S(JS) (1995), 14 RFL (......
  • Evidence; procedure; costs
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Archive Child Support Guidelines in Canada, 2020
    • June 23, 2019
    ...ON: Carswell, 1996) c 14, “Appeals,” part 11, “Stay of Support and Custody Orders Pending Appeal.” And see Sharifpour v Rostami, 2018 BCCA 458, wherein it was held that the jurisdiction to grant a stay pending appeal lies with the court that made the order. 169 F(E) v S(JS) (1995), 14 RFL (......
  • Table of cases
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Archive Child Support Guidelines in Canada, 2020
    • June 23, 2019
    .................................................................................................... 254, 284, 285 Sharifpour v Rostami, 2018 BCCA 458 ................................................................................................................... 574 Sharma v Sunak, 2011 ON......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 cases
  • Xu v. Chu,
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
    • August 18, 2021
    ...is that, generally, the Court of Appeal does not have jurisdiction to grant a stay of an order made under the FLA: Sharifpour v. Rostami, 2018 BCCA 458 at paras. 7–9 (Chambers); Kong v. Song, 2018 BCCA 472 at paras. 5–12 [18]       ......
6 books & journal articles
  • Table of Cases
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Child Support Guidelines in Canada, 2022
    • July 27, 2022
    ...300, 301 Sharifpour v Rostami, 2018 BCCA 458................................................................................................................... 606 Sharma v Sharma, 2022 MBQB 27.........................................................................................34, 35, 4......
  • Table of cases
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Archive Child Support Guidelines in Canada, 2020
    • June 23, 2019
    .................................................................................................... 254, 284, 285 Sharifpour v Rostami, 2018 BCCA 458 ................................................................................................................... 574 Sharma v Sunak, 2011 ON......
  • Evidence; Procedure; Costs
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Child Support Guidelines in Canada, 2022
    • July 27, 2022
    ...v National Dental Examining Board, 2019 ABQB 283 at paras 817–20. 176 See Vavrek v Vavrek, 2019 ABCA 235. And see Sharifpour v Rostami, 2018 BCCA 458, wherein it was held that the jurisdiction to grant a stay pending appeal lies with the court that made the 177 F(E) v S(JS) (1995), 14 RFL (......
  • Evidence; procedure; costs
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Archive Child Support Guidelines in Canada, 2020
    • June 23, 2019
    ...ON: Carswell, 1996) c 14, “Appeals,” part 11, “Stay of Support and Custody Orders Pending Appeal.” And see Sharifpour v Rostami, 2018 BCCA 458, wherein it was held that the jurisdiction to grant a stay pending appeal lies with the court that made the order. 169 F(E) v S(JS) (1995), 14 RFL (......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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