Misplaced Pages

Amchem Products Inc v British Columbia (Workers' Compensation Board)

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
(Redirected from Amchem Products Inc. v. British Columbia Worker's Compensation Board) Supreme Court of Canada case
Amchem Products Inc v British Columbia (Workers' Compensation Board)
Supreme Court of CanadaSupreme Court of Canada
Hearing: May 25, 1992
Judgment: March 25, 1993
Full case nameWorkers' Compensation Board and others v. Amchem Products Incorporated and others;
Workers' Compensation Board and others v. T & N plc;
Workers' Compensation Board and others v. The Flintkote Company
Citations 1 S.C.R. 897
Docket No.22256
Prior historyJudgment against the Workers' Compensation Board by the Court of Appeal for British Columbia
RulingAppeal granted.
Holding
  1. An injunction to prevent a party from filing a claim in a different court should only be done when a serious injustice will occur if the other court fails to decline jurisdiction, and should not be done if there is pending proceeding in another court.
  2. The test for declining jurisdiction is whether there is another forum more convenient and appropriate for pursuit of the action and securing the ends of justice.
Court membership
Chief Justice: Antonio Lamer
Puisne Justices: Gérard La Forest, Claire L'Heureux-Dubé, John Sopinka, Charles Gonthier, Peter Cory, Beverley McLachlin, William Stevenson, Frank Iacobucci
Reasons given
Unanimous reasons bySopinka J.
Lamer C.J. and L'Heureux-Dubé, Stevenson, and Iacobucci JJ. took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.

Amchem Products Inc v British Columbia (Workers' Compensation Board), 1 S.C.R. 897 is a leading decision on forum non conveniens by the Supreme Court of Canada. The Court overturned an anti-suit injunction issued by the British Columbia Supreme Court against the courts in Texas on the basis that the British Columbia (BC) court was not necessarily the better forum for the case.

Background

A number of BC residents began an action against several US manufacturers of asbestos in Texas. The Texas court accepted jurisdiction over the matter and heard the case. The manufacturers applied to the BC Supreme Court to issue an anti-suit injunction, arguing that the proper forum for the plaintiffs would be in BC and not Texas.

The BC Supreme Court issued the injunction. In response, Texas issued an "anti-anti-suit injunction". The BC Supreme Court judgment was upheld on appeal to the BC Court of Appeal.

Ruling of the Court

The Supreme Court of Canada overturned the judgment and found that there was insufficient grounds to deny Texas jurisdiction.

The Court adopts the test for forum non conveniens from Spiliada Maritime Corp. v. Cansulex Ltd., A.C. 460

See also

References

  1. SCC Case Information - Docket 22256 Supreme Court of Canada
  2. La Forest, Gerard V. (1996). "The Expanding Role of the Supreme Court of Canada in International Law Issues 34 Canadian Yearbook of International Law 1996". Canadian Yearbook of International Law. 34: 89. Retrieved 18 October 2016.
  3. Ivankovich, Ivan F. "Enforcing U.S. Judgments in Canada: Things are Looking Up 15 Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business 1994-1995". Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business. 15: 491. Retrieved 18 October 2016.
  4. "Anti-Suit Injunctions Restraining Litigation Outside Canada: The Amchem Decision". Archived from the original on 2012-09-09. Retrieved 2012-03-03.
  5. "Forum Non Conveniens, In a Nutshell". 25 February 2009. Archived from the original on 11 April 2016. Retrieved 18 October 2016.
  6. "Amchem Products Incorporated v. British Columbia (Workers' Compensation Board) - SCC Cases (Lexum)". Archived from the original on 2012-06-03. Retrieved 18 October 2016.
  7. Affairs, Office of the Commissioner for Federal Judicial (April 2011). "Federal Courts Reports - [2003] 4 F.C. 826". Retrieved 18 October 2016.
  8. "Province of Prince Edward Island in the Supreme Court - Trial Division between Polar Foods International Inc. and Jensen Tuna Inc" (PDF). 24 September 2002. Archived from the original (PDF) on 3 March 2016.

External links

Categories: