Search for: "State v. McKercher"
Results 1 - 13
of 13
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Jul 2013, 8:31 am
Saskatchewan law firm McKercher LLP should have obtained its client’s consent before agreeing to represent an employee suing the company the firm was already working for on a variety of cases.In Canadian National Railway Co. v. [read post]
24 May 2012, 9:56 am
They include: Weinberg v. [read post]
21 Jan 2013, 7:14 am
McKercher LLP on Thursday.Jan. 21 — Newfoundland and Labrador — R. v. [read post]
28 Jun 2012, 1:38 pm
” This rule was first articulated in R. v. [read post]
3 Jan 2013, 8:13 am
This year, the Supreme Court of Canada will likely decide Canadian National Railway v McKercher LLP. [read post]
18 May 2023, 4:00 am
The Supreme Court of Canada summarized the applicable principle (from the 1990 decision in MacDonald Estate v Martin) in its 2013 decision in CN Railway v McKercher as follows: A lawyer cannot act in a matter where he may use confidential information obtained from a former or current client to the detriment of that client. [read post]
3 Jan 2014, 10:45 am
This issue has been considered in the United States since Watergate, but this case may be the first time it has been publicly observable here.10. [read post]
20 Feb 2015, 4:00 am
” Canada (Attorney General) v. [read post]
22 Nov 2018, 4:00 am
War is the means by which nation states have sometimes resolved their differences. [read post]
8 Jan 2015, 6:00 am
Law Society of British Columbia and Black v. [read post]
13 Feb 2014, 4:00 am
McKercher (2013). [read post]
7 Jul 2013, 5:45 am
Baxter: PTO Reexamination Decision Trumps Prior Decisions by the Federal Circuit http://t.co/i0NyO2l36t -> State AGs blast Google over YouTube ads for illicit products http://t.co/uSJ9k0zQeP -> Google Glass privacy concerns persist in Congress http://t.co/YDvZStJm7t -> State AGs say Google profits from harmful YouTube videosr http://t.co/XfUml6hzrR -> Apple sued over Siri in patent case in China http://t.co/QkVMRNgcO9 -> No Takedown and Staydown in France… [read post]
2 Jan 2019, 4:00 am
In R. v. [read post]
