Two recent Canadian criminal court rulings considered charges resulting from the conduct of passengers aboard international commercial flights that landed in Canada.
These rulings confirm the jurisdiction of Canadian authorities to prosecute those who, during a flight that terminates in Canada, commit acts that would be considered a criminal offence under Canadian law.
In a previous post, we wrote about an Ontario Superior Court of Justice decision regarding a clause in a contract that required all disputes to be decided according to Arizona law and resolved by the courts of Arizona. The judge decided not to enforce the “jurisdiction and choice of law” clause, and ruled that the litigation between Honeywell Inc. and Expedition Helicopters Inc. (“Expedition”) should proceed in Ontario. Honeywell launched an appeal of the decision and the Ontario Court of Appeal recently overturned the lower court’s ruling. As a result, the action commenced in Ontario will not proceed and the parties must either settle the dispute or have it resolved in Arizona.
Honeywell Inc. leased an engine to Expedition Helicopters Inc. for use in its Astar 350 helicopter. The engine failed and the aircraft crashed. Expedition is located in Ontario and it sued Honeywell in Ontario. Honeywell brought a motion to stay the action on the grounds that the Engine Lease Agreement contained a forum selection clause which stated that the Courts of Phoenix, Arizona, would have exclusive jurisdiction over any actions arising in connection with the engine lease. Gauthier, J. of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice dismissed Honeywell’s motion and allowed the action to proceed in Ontario (Expedition Helicopters Ltd. v. Honeywell Inc.).
Sign up to receive email notifications on the latest posts!
Published by:
Alexander Holburn Beaudin & Lang LLP
