Advanced Search
- All Databases (4,782)
- Decisions (2,369)
- Resources (2,169)
4,782 result(s)
-
3,126.
R. v. Clement - [1981] 2 SCR 468 - 1981-10-06
Supreme Court JudgmentsCourts
John William Wallace Clement (Accused) Respondent. 1981: June 21; 1981: October 6. [...] William W. Morton, Q.C., for the appellant. Len Fishman, for the respondent.
-
3,127.
Re: Resolution to amend the Constitution - [1981] 1 SCR 753 - 1981-09-28
Supreme Court JudgmentsConstitutional law
Ross W. Paisley, Q.C., and William Henkel, Q. C., for the Attorney General for Alberta. [...] As Sir William Jowitt said, and quoted earlier, we must [Page 789] operate the old machinery perhaps one more time. [...] Solicitors for the Attorney General for Alberta: Ross W. Painsley and William Henkel, Edmonton.
-
3,128.
SCR | RCS [1981] vol 1 - 1981-09-28
Canada Supreme Court ReportsWilliam Henkel, Q.C., for the intervener, the Attorney General of Alberta. [...] Procureur du procureur général de l'Alberta: William Henkel, Edmonton. [...] D'après la déposition du professeur Williams, que le juge de première
-
3,129.
Myers v. Peel County Board of Education - [1981] 2 SCR 21 - 1981-06-22
Supreme Court JudgmentsTorts
Thornton et al. v. Board of School Trustees of School District No. 57 (Prince George) et al., [1976] 5 W.W.R. 240 (B.C.C.A.); Williams v. Eady (1893), 10 T.L.R. 41; McKay et al. v. The Board of the Govan School Unit No. 29 of Saskatchewan et al., [1968] S.C.R. 589; Dziwenka et al. v. Her Majesty The Queen in right of [...] The standard of care to be exercised by school authorities in providing for the supervision and protection of students for whom they are responsible is that of the careful or prudent parent, described in Williams v. Eady[3].
-
3,130.
Seneca College v. Bhadauria - [1981] 2 SCR 181 - 1981-06-22
Supreme Court JudgmentsTorts
What we have here, if the Court of Appeal is correct in its conclusion, is a species of an economic tort, new in its instance and founded, even if indirectly, on a statute enacted in an area outside a fully recognized area of common law duty: see Williams, “The Effect of Penal Legislation in the Law of Tort” (1960), 23 Mod.
-
3,131.
Attorney General of Alberta et al. v. Putnam et al. - [1981] 2 SCR 267 - 1981-05-28
Supreme Court JudgmentsConstitutional law
R.W. Paisley, Q.C., and William Henkel, Q.C., for the appellants. M.G. Stevens Guille, for the respondents. [...] Solicitors for the appellants: R.W. Paisley and William Henkel, Edmonton.
-
3,132.
Re Residential Tenancies Act - [1981] 1 SCR 714 - 1981-05-28
Supreme Court JudgmentsConstitutional law
William J. Atkinson, Henri Brun and Jean-François Jobin, for the intervener the Attorney General of Quebec. [...] William Henkel, Q.C., for the intervener the Attorney General of Alberta.
-
3,133.
Thériault v. The Queen - [1981] 1 SCR 336 - 1981-05-28
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
As Sir William Brett M.R. said in Abrath v. North Eastern Ry Co[2]. at p. 453, “It is no misdirection not to tell the jury everything which might have been told them”.
-
3,134.
Liverpool & London & Globe Insurance v. Canadian General Electric Ltd. - [1981] 1 SCR 600 - 1981-05-11
Supreme Court JudgmentsInsurance
The trial judge appears to have preferred the description of the episode by Dr. Williams. [...] Elsewhere in cross-examination, however, Dr. Williams expressed views on the general nature of “explosions”: [...] The evidence of Dr. Williams accepted by the trial judge was to the [Page 617]
-
3,135.
Nault v. Canadian Consumer Co. Ltd. - [1981] 1 SCR 553 - 1981-05-11
Supreme Court JudgmentsCivil procedure
George R. Hendy and William Brock, for the respondent. English version of the judgment of the Court delivered by
-
3,136.
Young v. R. - [1981] 2 SCR 39 - 1981-05-11
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
In that case a trial had taken place over a period of twenty days, and there was an omission to direct the jury on many of the no doubt complex issues which had been considered in the course of it, but this court cited the words of SIR WILLIAM BRETT, M.R. [later Lord Esher], in Abrath v. North Eastern Ry. Co. (1883), 11
-
3,137.
Wire Rope Industries of Canada (1966) Ltd. v. B.C. Marine Shipbuilders Ltd. et al. - [1981] 1 SCR 363 - 1981-03-19
Supreme Court JudgmentsCourts
Maritime law
H. Williams who generally reached conclusions similar to that of McCulloch.
-
3,138.
Rothman v. The Queen - [1981] 1 SCR 640 - 1981-03-02
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
Professor Glanville Williams, in The Proof of Guilt, (2nd ed., 1958), puts it this way (at pp. 37‑8):
-
3,139.
Nova Scotia Government Employees Association et al. v. Civil Service Commission of Nova Scotia et al. - [1981] 1 SCR 211 - 1981-02-17
Supreme Court JudgmentsLabour law
William Wilson and Mollie Gallagher, for the respondents. The judgment of Laskin C.J. and Dickson, McIntyre and Chouinard JJ. was delivered by
-
3,140.
Boggs v. R. - [1981] 1 SCR 49 - 1981-02-03
Supreme Court JudgmentsConstitutional law
Criminal law
William Henkel, Q.C., for the intervener, the Attorney General of Alberta.
-
3,141.
Fulton et al. v. Energy Resources Conservation Board et al. - [1981] 1 SCR 153 - 1981-01-27
Supreme Court JudgmentsConstitutional law
William Henkel, Q.C., for the Attorney General of Alberta. T.B. Smith, Q.C., for the Attorney General of Canada.
-
3,142.
R. v. Aziz - [1981] 1 SCR 188 - 1981-01-27
Supreme Court JudgmentsConstitutional law
Criminal law
Solicitor for the Attorney General for Alberta: William Henkel, Edmonton.
-
3,143.
SCR | RCS [1980] vol 2 - 1980-12-18
Canada Supreme Court ReportsGlanville Williams notes cusé le droit d'être acquitté. Glanville Williams 25 (1937), 59 C.L.R. 279. 25 (1937), 159 C.L.R. 279. [...] 254 HECHTER et al. v. THURSTON The Chief Justice [1980] 2 S.C.R. William Samuel Hechter and David William William Samuel Hechter et David William Gordon Reycraft (Plaintiffs) Appellants; Gordon Reycraft (Demandeurs) Appelants; and et Harold Elmer Thurston (Defendant) Harold Elmer Thurston (Défendeur) Intimé. [...] William J. Simpson, Q.C., and Charles T. Hackland, for the plaintiff, respondent.
-
3,144.
Swietlinski v. R. - [1980] 2 SCR 956 - 1980-12-18
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
Comm. 198; and the words of Glanville Williams, Textbook of Criminal Law (1978), at p. 204:
-
3,145.
Williams v. Hillier et al. - [1980] 2 SCR 368 - 1980-12-18
Supreme Court JudgmentsFamily law
Williams v. Hillier et al., Williams c. Hillier et autre, [1980] 2 SCR 368, [1980] 2 RCS 368 [...] Williams v. Hillier et al., [1980] 2 S.C.R. 368 Date: 1980-12-18 Ernest Charles Williams Appellant;
-
3,146.
Beaufort Realties et al. v. Chomedey Aluminum - [1980] 2 SCR 718 - 1980-11-12
Supreme Court JudgmentsContract
William J. Simpson, Q.C., and Charles T. Hackland, for the plaintiff, respondent.
-
3,147.
Homex Realty v. Wyoming - [1980] 2 SCR 1011 - 1980-11-12
Supreme Court JudgmentsMunicipal law
A copy of this subdivision agreement was registered against the lands of Homex by the Town Solicitor, William M’Clean Dawson, on September 25, 1975, with registration number 375351. [...] Other authorities to the same point are Ex parte Fry[26], at p. 737; The King v. General Commissioners for the Purposes of the Income Tax Acts[27], at p. 519; The King v. Williams[28], at p. 614, as to the exercise of discretion in the first instance.
-
3,148.
Hechter et al. v. Thurston - [1980] 2 SCR 254 - 1980-10-21
Supreme Court JudgmentsSale
William Samuel Hechter and David William Gordon Reycraft (Plaintiffs) Appellants;
-
3,149.
Gralewicz et al. v. R. - [1980] 2 SCR 493 - 1980-10-07
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
Labour law
Roman Adolfe Gralewicz, John Royce, Roy Norris Willis, Roger Desjardins, Richard Thomasson, Edwin Aldon Williams, Hedley Harnum, Andre Bansept, William Lisenchuk, William Mercer and George Baldo (Plaintiff) Appellants; [...] (1) that Roman Adolfe GRALEWICZ, John ROYCE, Roy Norris WILLIS, Roger DESJARDINS, Richard THOMASSON, Edwin Aldon WILLIAMS, Hedley HARNUM, Andre BANSEPT, William LISENCHUK, Walter MERCER and George BALDO, between the 1st day of January 1971 and the 18th day of January 1977 in the Province of Ontario and elsewhere in the [...] That Roman Adolfe Gralewicz, John Royce, Roy Norris Willis, Roger Desjardins, Richard Thomasson, Edwin Aldon Williams, Hedley Harnum, Andre Bansept, William Lisenchuk, Walter Mercer, and George Baldo between the 1st day of January, 1971 and the 18th day of January, 1977, in the Province of Ontario and elsewhere in the
-
3,150.
Molis v. R. - [1980] 2 SCR 356 - 1980-10-07
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
The significance of this case as well as of the many exceptions noted in Williams’ work is that Criminal Code, s. 19, is not absolute and cannot be applied without reserve to every situation where the essential mistake is one of law. [...] Apart from the exceptions arising out of specific mental elements of culpability such as fraud, Williams suggests several other approaches to exceptions, of which two seem to be pertinent to this case.