zutphen – English Translation – Keybot Dictionary

Spacer TTN Translation Network TTN TTN Login Deutsch Français Spacer Help
Source Languages Target Languages
Keybot 21 Results  csc.lexum.org
  Cour suprême du Canada ...  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
Dywidag Systems International, Canada Ltd. c. Zutphen Brothers Construction Ltd.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine csc.lexum.org as primary domain
Dywidag systems international, canada ltd. v. Zutphen brothers construction ltd.
  Cour suprême du Canada ...  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
Procureurs de l'intimée Zutphen Brothers Construction Limited:  Doucet MacNeil Chiasson, Halifax.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine csc.lexum.org as primary domain
Solicitors for the respondent Zutphen Brothers Construction Limited:  Doucet MacNeil Chiasson, Halifax.
  Cour suprême du Canada ...  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
Elwin MacNeil, c.r., A. Wayne MacKay et Edmond W. Chiasson, pour l'intimée Zutphen Brothers Construction Limited.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine csc.lexum.org as primary domain
Elwin MacNeil, Q.C., A. Wayne MacKay and Edmond W. Chiasson, for the respondent Zutphen Brothers Construction Limited.
  Cour suprême du Canada ...  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
Dywidag Systems International, Canada Ltd. c. Zutphen Brothers Construction Ltd. - [1990] 1 R.C.S. 705 - 1990-03-29
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine csc.lexum.org as primary domain
Dywidag systems international, canada ltd. v. Zutphen brothers construction ltd. - [1990] 1 S.C.R. 705 - 1990-03-29
  Cour suprême du Canada ...  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
Le juge Jones, au nom de la Division d'appel, a rejeté l'argument de Zutphen fondé sur l'art. 7 de la Charte mais a conclu que les dispositions législatives contestées portaient atteinte à l'art. 15 de la Charte.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine csc.lexum.org as primary domain
Jones J.A., writing for the Appeal Division, rejected Zutphen's argument based on s. 7 of the Charter, but held that the impugned legislative provisions infringed s. 15 of the Charter.  Citing R. v. Big M Drug Mart Ltd., [1985] 1 S.C.R. 295, he held that a corporation was entitled to challenge the constitutionality of the Federal Court Act and the Crown Liability Act on the grounds that they contravened s. 15 of the Charter.  He held that the impugned  provisions of these Acts violated s. 15(1) because they placed the Crown in a preferred position compared to the other parties.  Finally, he held that this violation could not be justified under s. 1 of the Charter since the Crown had not proven that exclusive Federal Court jurisdiction was either necessary in this case or that it was related to concerns that were pressing and substantial.
  Cour suprême du Canada ...  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
Zutphen Brothers Construction Ltd. (1987), 76 N.S.R. (2d) 398, la Cour d'appel de la Nouvelle‑Écosse a conclu que la compétence exclusive de la Cour fédérale à l'égard de demandes contre la Couronne fédérale, qui fait que la Couronne fédérale peut poursuivre le sujet devant les cours supérieures d'une province mais que le sujet ne peut poursuivre la Couronne devant ces mêmes cours, viole la garantie d'égalité devant la loi contenue à l'art.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine csc.lexum.org as primary domain
My conclusion that s. 17(3)(c) of the Federal Court Act confers jurisdiction on the Federal Court to deal with the issues in this case is, of course, premised on the constitutionality of the section.  In Dywidag Systems International Canada Ltd. v. Zutphen Brothers Construction Ltd. (1987), 76 N.S.R. (2d) 398, the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal held that the exclusive jurisdiction of the Federal Court with respect to claims against the federal Crown, as a result of which the federal Crown can sue the subject in the provincial superior courts but the subject cannot sue the Crown in these courts, infringes the guarantee of equality before the law contained in s. 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.  Leave to appeal that decision to this Court was granted on July 29, 1987, [1987] 2 S.C.R. ix.  No constitutional challenge was, however, raised in this case.
  Cour suprême du Canada ...  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
En 1983, la Couronne fédérale a conclu un contrat avec Zutphen Brothers Construction Ltd. relativement à la reconstruction d'un quai délabré à Glace Bay, en Nouvelle‑Écosse. Deux semaines plus tard, Zutphen a conclu un contrat de sous‑traitance avec Dywidag Systems International, Canada Ltd. pour la reconstruction du quai, conformément aux plans et devis contenus dans le contrat principal préparé par le ministère des Travaux publics.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine csc.lexum.org as primary domain
In 1983, the Federal Crown contracted with Zutphen Brothers Construction Ltd. for the reconstruction of a dilapidated wharf in Glace Bay, Nova Scotia.  Two weeks later, Zutphen entered into a subcontract with Dywidag Systems International, Canada Ltd. for the reconstruction of the wharf in accordance with the plans and specifications contained in the primary contract prepared by the Department of Public Works.
  Cour suprême du Canada ...  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
Afin d'éviter la multiplicité des actions, Zutphen a demandé à la Division de première instance de la Cour suprême de la Nouvelle‑Écosse d'ajouter la Couronne à titre de mise en cause dans l'action intentée par Dywidag.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine csc.lexum.org as primary domain
To avoid a multiplicity of actions, Zutphen brought an application to the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia, Trial Division, to add the Crown as a third party to the action commenced against it by Dywidag.  Zutphen argued that s. 17(1) and (2) of the Federal Court Act, R.S.C. 1970 (2nd Supp.), c. 10, as amended (now R.S.C., 1985, c. F-7), and s. 7(1) of the Crown Liability Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-38, as amended (now R.S.C., 1985, c. C-50, s. 15(1)) violate ss. 7 and 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.  Richard J., sitting in chambers, dismissed the application.  Zutphen appealed to the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia, Appeal Division.  The appeal was allowed and leave was granted to add the Crown as a third party.
  Cour suprême du Canada ...  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
Peu après, des différends ont surgi entre les trois parties. En 1985, Dywidag a poursuivi Zutphen devant la Cour suprême de la Nouvelle‑Écosse pour des pertes subies à la suite d'erreurs dans les plans et devis fournis par Zutphen.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine csc.lexum.org as primary domain
Disputes between the three parties soon arose.  In 1985, Dywidag sued Zutphen in the Nova Scotia Supreme Court for losses it had incurred because of errors in the plans and specifications provided by Zutphen.  When Zutphen defended itself by claiming that any errors in plans and specifications were caused by the Crown, Dywidag commenced a separate action in the Federal  Court of Canada against the Crown.  The Crown then notified Zutphen that it would claim against it for any losses it incurred as a result of the Federal Court action.
  Cour suprême du Canada ...  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
Zutphen a demandé à la Cour suprême de la Nouvelle‑Écosse d'ajouter la Couronne à titre de mise en cause dans l'action intentée par Dywidag. Le juge en chambre a rejeté l'argument de Zutphen selon lequel les par.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine csc.lexum.org as primary domain
Zutphen brought an application in the Nova Scotia Supreme Court to add the Crown as a third party to the action commenced against it by Dywidag.  The chambers judge rejected Zutphen's argument that s. 17(1) and (2) of the Federal Court Act and s. 7(1) of the Crown Liability Act, which give the Federal Court exclusive jurisdiction over claims against the Crown, violate ss. 7 and 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and dismissed the application.  The Court of Appeal set aside the decision, holding that the impugned legislative provisions infringed s. 15 of the Charter and that this violation could not be justified under s. 1 of the Charter.  This appeal is to determine whether s. 17(1) and (2) of the Federal Court Act and s. 7(1) of the Crown Liability Act contravene ss. 7 and 15 of the Charter.
  Cour suprême du Canada ...  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
La Reine, [1984] 2 R.C.S. 335; Dywidag Systems International Canada Ltd. v. Zutphen Brothers Construction Ltd. (1987), 76 N.S.R. (2d) 398; Amodu Tijani v. Southern Nigeria (Secretary), [1921] 2 A.C. 399.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine csc.lexum.org as primary domain
Applied:  ITO--International Terminal Operators Ltd. v. Miida Electronics Inc., [1986] 1 S.C.R. 752; Quebec North Shore Paper Co. v. Canadian Pacific Ltd., [1977] 2 S.C.R. 1054; McNamara Construction (Western) Ltd. v. The Queen, [1977] 2 S.C.R. 654; referred to:  Calder v. Attorney-General of British Columbia, [1973] S.C.R. 313;  Derrickson v. Derrickson, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 285;  Rhine v. The Queen; Prytula v. The Queen, [1980] 2 S.C.R. 442; Bensol Customs Brokers Ltd. v. Air Canada, [1979] 2 F.C. 575; Marshall v. The Queen, [1986] 1 F.C. 437; The Queen v. Thomas Fuller Construction Co. (1958) Ltd., [1980] 1 S.C.R. 695; Canadian Pacific Ltd. v. Paul, [1988] 2 S.C.R. 654; Guerin v. The Queen, [1984] 2 S.C.R. 335; Dywidag Systems International Canada Ltd. v. Zutphen Brothers Construction Ltd. (1987), 76 N.S.R. (2d) 398; Amodu Tijani v. Southern Nigeria (Secretary), [1921] 2 A.C. 399.
  Cour suprême du Canada ...  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
Peu après, des différends ont surgi entre les trois parties. En 1985, Dywidag a poursuivi Zutphen devant la Cour suprême de la Nouvelle‑Écosse pour des pertes subies à la suite d'erreurs dans les plans et devis fournis par Zutphen.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine csc.lexum.org as primary domain
Disputes between the three parties soon arose.  In 1985, Dywidag sued Zutphen in the Nova Scotia Supreme Court for losses it had incurred because of errors in the plans and specifications provided by Zutphen.  When Zutphen defended itself by claiming that any errors in plans and specifications were caused by the Crown, Dywidag commenced a separate action in the Federal  Court of Canada against the Crown.  The Crown then notified Zutphen that it would claim against it for any losses it incurred as a result of the Federal Court action.
  Cour suprême du Canada ...  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
Afin d'éviter la multiplicité des actions, Zutphen a demandé à la Division de première instance de la Cour suprême de la Nouvelle‑Écosse d'ajouter la Couronne à titre de mise en cause dans l'action intentée par Dywidag.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine csc.lexum.org as primary domain
To avoid a multiplicity of actions, Zutphen brought an application to the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia, Trial Division, to add the Crown as a third party to the action commenced against it by Dywidag.  Zutphen argued that s. 17(1) and (2) of the Federal Court Act, R.S.C. 1970 (2nd Supp.), c. 10, as amended (now R.S.C., 1985, c. F-7), and s. 7(1) of the Crown Liability Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-38, as amended (now R.S.C., 1985, c. C-50, s. 15(1)) violate ss. 7 and 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.  Richard J., sitting in chambers, dismissed the application.  Zutphen appealed to the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia, Appeal Division.  The appeal was allowed and leave was granted to add the Crown as a third party.
  Cour suprême du Canada ...  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
Afin d'éviter la multiplicité des actions, Zutphen a demandé à la Division de première instance de la Cour suprême de la Nouvelle‑Écosse d'ajouter la Couronne à titre de mise en cause dans l'action intentée par Dywidag.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine csc.lexum.org as primary domain
To avoid a multiplicity of actions, Zutphen brought an application to the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia, Trial Division, to add the Crown as a third party to the action commenced against it by Dywidag.  Zutphen argued that s. 17(1) and (2) of the Federal Court Act, R.S.C. 1970 (2nd Supp.), c. 10, as amended (now R.S.C., 1985, c. F-7), and s. 7(1) of the Crown Liability Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-38, as amended (now R.S.C., 1985, c. C-50, s. 15(1)) violate ss. 7 and 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.  Richard J., sitting in chambers, dismissed the application.  Zutphen appealed to the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia, Appeal Division.  The appeal was allowed and leave was granted to add the Crown as a third party.
  Cour suprême du Canada ...  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
Peu après, des différends ont surgi entre les trois parties. En 1985, Dywidag a poursuivi Zutphen devant la Cour suprême de la Nouvelle‑Écosse pour des pertes subies à la suite d'erreurs dans les plans et devis fournis par Zutphen.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine csc.lexum.org as primary domain
Disputes between the three parties soon arose.  In 1985, Dywidag sued Zutphen in the Nova Scotia Supreme Court for losses it had incurred because of errors in the plans and specifications provided by Zutphen.  When Zutphen defended itself by claiming that any errors in plans and specifications were caused by the Crown, Dywidag commenced a separate action in the Federal  Court of Canada against the Crown.  The Crown then notified Zutphen that it would claim against it for any losses it incurred as a result of the Federal Court action.
  Cour suprême du Canada ...  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
Dywidag Systems International, Canada Ltd. c. Zutphen Brothers Construction Ltd., [1990] 1 R.C.S. 705
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine csc.lexum.org as primary domain
Dywidag Systems International, Canada Ltd. v. Zutphen Brothers Construction Ltd., [1990] 1 S.C.R. 705
  Cour suprême du Canada ...  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
En 1983, la Couronne fédérale a conclu un contrat avec Zutphen Brothers Construction Ltd. relativement à la reconstruction d'un quai délabré à Glace Bay, en Nouvelle‑Écosse. Deux semaines plus tard, Zutphen a conclu un contrat de sous‑traitance avec Dywidag Systems International, Canada Ltd. pour la reconstruction du quai, conformément aux plans et devis contenus dans le contrat principal préparé par le ministère des Travaux publics.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine csc.lexum.org as primary domain
In 1983, the Federal Crown contracted with Zutphen Brothers Construction Ltd. for the reconstruction of a dilapidated wharf in Glace Bay, Nova Scotia.  Two weeks later, Zutphen entered into a subcontract with Dywidag Systems International, Canada Ltd. for the reconstruction of the wharf in accordance with the plans and specifications contained in the primary contract prepared by the Department of Public Works.
  Cour suprême du Canada ...  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
répertorié:  dywidag systems international, canada ltd. c. zutphen brothers construction ltd.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine csc.lexum.org as primary domain
indexed as:  dywidag systems international, canada ltd. v. zutphen brothers construction ltd.
  Cour suprême du Canada ...  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
Peu après, des différends ont surgi entre les trois parties. En 1985, Dywidag a poursuivi Zutphen devant la Cour suprême de la Nouvelle‑Écosse pour des pertes subies à la suite d'erreurs dans les plans et devis fournis par Zutphen.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine csc.lexum.org as primary domain
Disputes between the three parties soon arose.  In 1985, Dywidag sued Zutphen in the Nova Scotia Supreme Court for losses it had incurred because of errors in the plans and specifications provided by Zutphen.  When Zutphen defended itself by claiming that any errors in plans and specifications were caused by the Crown, Dywidag commenced a separate action in the Federal  Court of Canada against the Crown.  The Crown then notified Zutphen that it would claim against it for any losses it incurred as a result of the Federal Court action.
  Cour suprême du Canada ...  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
Zutphen a demandé à la Cour suprême de la Nouvelle‑Écosse d'ajouter la Couronne à titre de mise en cause dans l'action intentée par Dywidag. Le juge en chambre a rejeté l'argument de Zutphen selon lequel les par.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine csc.lexum.org as primary domain
Zutphen brought an application in the Nova Scotia Supreme Court to add the Crown as a third party to the action commenced against it by Dywidag.  The chambers judge rejected Zutphen's argument that s. 17(1) and (2) of the Federal Court Act and s. 7(1) of the Crown Liability Act, which give the Federal Court exclusive jurisdiction over claims against the Crown, violate ss. 7 and 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and dismissed the application.  The Court of Appeal set aside the decision, holding that the impugned legislative provisions infringed s. 15 of the Charter and that this violation could not be justified under s. 1 of the Charter.  This appeal is to determine whether s. 17(1) and (2) of the Federal Court Act and s. 7(1) of the Crown Liability Act contravene ss. 7 and 15 of the Charter.