Toliver v Koepke, 2017 ABQB 686
| Judge | Eric F. Macklin |
| Court | Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada) |
| Case Date | November 09, 2017 |
| Jurisdiction | Alberta |
| Citations | 2017 ABQB 686 |
-
- 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
2 practice notes
-
Paragon Capital Corporation Ltd v Starke Dominion Ltd, 2020 ABCA 216
...and should be regarded as mandatory. The only Alberta authority which addresses the application of r 10.4 to date, Toliver v Koepke, 2017 ABQB 686, AJ No 1184, does not address this interpretative issue. The absence of precedent addressing the timing required to meet the requirements in r 1......
-
Paragon Capital Corporation Ltd v Starke Dominion Ltd, 2018 ABQB 351
...Memorandum No 12.17, Alberta Rules of Court Project: Costs and Sanctions (Edmonton: February 2005) at 108. [26] In Toliver v Koepke, 2017 ABQB 686 at para 39, Macklin J said the Rule 10.4 is the new version of r 625 of the old Rules of Court. No case appears to have yet considered r 10.4. H......
2 cases
-
Paragon Capital Corporation Ltd v Starke Dominion Ltd, 2020 ABCA 216
...and should be regarded as mandatory. The only Alberta authority which addresses the application of r 10.4 to date, Toliver v Koepke, 2017 ABQB 686, AJ No 1184, does not address this interpretative issue. The absence of precedent addressing the timing required to meet the requirements in r 1......
-
Paragon Capital Corporation Ltd v Starke Dominion Ltd, 2018 ABQB 351
...Memorandum No 12.17, Alberta Rules of Court Project: Costs and Sanctions (Edmonton: February 2005) at 108. [26] In Toliver v Koepke, 2017 ABQB 686 at para 39, Macklin J said the Rule 10.4 is the new version of r 625 of the old Rules of Court. No case appears to have yet considered r 10.4. H......