Checking in to Club Resorts: How Courts are Applying the New Test for Jurisdiction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2012 the Supreme Court of Canada released a very important decision on the taking of jurisdiction in civil cases. In Club Resorts Ltd v Van Breda the court changed the common law test for assumed jurisdiction — jurisdiction that is not based on the defendant’s presence in the forum at the time proceedings are started or the defendant’s consent to litigation in the forum — in several key respects. This article examines how Club Resorts is being applied by lower courts. In doing so, it considers five central issues: (i) the extent to which the lower courts have adopted the new analysis; (ii) how lower courts are interpreting the four presumptive connecting factors established in Club Resorts; (iii) the extent to which lower courts have created additional presumptive connecting factors; (iv) the operation of the rebuttal of the presumption; and (v) the treatment of concurrent and multiple causes of action. The article also considers the decision’s impact in provinces that have enacted the Court Jurisdiction and Proceedings Transfer Act and on the discretionary staying of proceedings under the doctrine of forum non conveniens.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.025 | 0.085 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.058 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".