British Columbia. In the Provinces of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Xxxxxx Xxxxxx Island the above scheduled rates will be subject to the provisions of Appendix "A" of this Agreement.
British Columbia. 2.1 British Columbia will continue to provide Canada and FNESC with aggregate data on the provision of low incidence high cost special education, as well as the number of Individual Education Plans (IEPs) in place for First Nation Students, no later than July 30th of each year.
British Columbia. The facts (drawn from Justice Xxxxx’x synopsis) are: The claim was launched by the Blueberry River First Nations (Blueberry) whose territory is located in northeastern British Columbia; In 1900, Blueberry became a party to Treaty No. 8, which was first signed in 1899; Blueberry alleged the cumulative effects of industrial development within its territory have had significant adverse impacts on the meaningful exercise of their treaty rights, and that this resulted in a breach of the Treaty; Treaty 8 protects the Indigenous parties’ rights to xxxx, trap and fish in the Treaty area, subject to regulations made by the government, and except over areas the government may have “taken up” for settlement, mining, lumbering, trading or other purposes; At the time the Treaty was entered into, the Indigenous parties were promised by the Treaty Commissioners that they would remain free to xxxx and fish in the Treaty area; Over the 120 years since the Treaty was signed, Blueberry witnessed extensive industrial development in its territory; Blueberry’s evidence was that industrial development (logging, mining, settlement, oil and gas, hydroelectricity, agriculture) pushed Blueberry’s members to the margins of their territory to seek to exercise their constitutionally protected treaty rights; Certain species of wildlife (caribou, marten and others) were particularly impacted by development; Blueberry also said that the effects of the industrial development are well beyond what was contemplated at the time of its adhesion to the Treaty. In response, BC argued that the infringements did not leave Blueberry without any meaningful hunting and fishing rights. BC pointed to the consultation process that is undertaken for each new development. BC decided not to present evidence of justification of its regulatory actions, saying that it first needed to have Blueberry present the scope of its Treaty rights and their infringement. Justice Xxxxx determined, based on the 160 days of evidence and argument at the hearing, that BC’s failure to consider the cumulative effects of infringements by industrial development and other taking up amounted to a breach of Treaty 8. BC’s power to take up lands could only be exercised in a manner that respects the promises in the Treaty, and those promises included protecting Blueberry’s rights to xxxx, fish and trap in their territory. BC had not adjusted its approvals processes despite decades of concerns expressed by Blueberry. She found that it ...
British Columbia. 82 The defendant relies on the judgment of Xxxxxxxxx J. in that case at (2003), 12 B.C.L.R. (4th) 121, 2003 BCSC 234 ( L.R. No. 2 ), in which after amending the common issue to narrow it to re- flect what was envisioned by the Court of Appeal in certifying it, Xxxxxxxxx J. at 91 warned the plaintiffs that in doing so she "reached a precarious balance between a potentially workable class proceeding and unmanageable confusion...". 83 In L.R. No. 2, Xxxxxxxxx J. was facing an application for decertification in the face of the de- fendant's submission that the case "as presently conceived and conducted by the plaintiffs is not the proceedings certified by the Court of Appeal and that it is irredeemably individual and is not man- ageable as a class proceeding." ( supra, 54) 84 The essential problem identified by the defendants in L.R. No. 2 and facedby Xxxxxxxxx J. is set out in paragraph 30 of her reasons for judgment which read as follows: In my view, it is not useful to begin the analysis of systemic negligence from the assumption that "it is now clear that sexual and physical abuse of children took place at the school throughout its his- tory." That very assertion inappropriately and perhaps erroneously (without having heard the evi- dence it is too early to tell) informs the analysis of a developing and changing standard of care over 42 years in a way that undermines the potential for conducting this action as a class proceeding. To start from such an all- encompassing assertion necessarily puts the defendant to the task of identify- ing an unending series of circumstances in order to attempt to answer, refute or admit on a piece- meal basis the facts which underlie that assertion. This renders the proceedings unmanageable be- cause individual complainants are not before the court, the alleged abusers will not be called, and the individual events of sexual misconduct are not in issue, even with regard to the prima facie reli- ability of the reports concerning them.
British Columbia. Owner Operators Letters of Understanding • Letter of Understanding 1 – Move into body of agreement under article 5 • Letter of Understanding 2 – Renew • Letter of Understanding 3 – Renew and move under new language on reroutes or under article 5 • Letter of Understanding 4 – Move into Article 5 with changes. • Letter of Understanding 5 – Agreed to delete already • Letter of Understanding 6 – Agreed to delete already • Letter of Understanding 7 – Xxxxx could be discussion on national XXX • Letter of Understanding 8 – Renewed already • Letter of Understanding 9 – Xxxxx and move into body under article 13 • Letter of understanding 10- Deleted already • Letter of Understanding 11 – Agreed to delete already • Letter of Understanding 12 – Xxxxx. • Letter of Understanding 13 – Renewed already. • Letter of Understanding 14 – Deleted in local bargaining • Letter of Understanding 15 – Move into body under Schedule A • Letter of Understanding 16 – Update. • Letter of understanding 17 – Renew. Hourly Letters of Understanding • Letter of Understanding 1 – Move into body under Article 15. • Letter of Understanding 2 – Move into body under Article 15. • Letter of Understanding 3 – Delete, covered in new restructuring provisions. • Letter of Understanding 4 – Renewed already move under article 24 • Letter of Understanding 5 – Same as XXX #1 under O/O • Letter of Understanding 6 – Renewed already. • Letter of Understanding 7 – Delete. • Letter of Understanding 8 – Xxxxx. • Letter of Understanding 9 – Xxxxx. • Letter of Understanding 10 – Deleted already • Letter of Understanding 11 – Move into body under Article 28. • Letter of Understanding 12 – Xxxxx and add in a completion date. Leave as XXX subject to national language • Letter of Understanding 13 – Xxxxx. • Letter of Understanding 14 – Xxxxx as per local bargaining agreement. • Letter of Understanding 15 – and move under article 28 • Letter of Understanding 16 – Renewed as per local bargaining agreement. • Letter of Understanding 17 – Update and renew based on this MOA.
British Columbia. Her Majesty The Queen In Right of the Province of British Columbia as represented by The Minister of the Environment PO Box 9339 Stn. Prov. Govt. Xxxxxxxx, XX X0X 0X0 Her Majesty The Queen In Right of The Province Of British Columbia as represented by The Minister Of Finance (PST-BC/Income Tax) Consumer Taxation Branch PO Box 9442 Stn. Prov. Govt. Xxxxxxxx, XX X0X 0X0 Ministry Of The Attorney General Revenue & Taxation Group Legal Services Branch 601 - 0000 Xxxxxxx Xxxxxx PO Box 9289 Stn. Prov. Govt. Xxxxxxxx, XX X0X 0X0 Attention: Xxxxx Xxxxx Email: xxxxx.xxxxx@xxx.xx.xx Tel: 000-000-0000 Fax: 000-000-0000 WorkSafeBC (British Columbia) 0000 Xxxxxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxxx, XX XX Xxx 0000 Xxx Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxxxx, XX X0X 0X0 The District of North Vancouver 000 Xxxx Xxxxxx Xxxx Xxxxx Xxxxxxxxx, XX X0X 0X0 Attention: Legal Department Email: xxxxxxx@xxx.xxx The City of Surrey 00000 - 000 Xxxxxx Xxxxxx, XX X0X 0X0 Attention: Legal Services Email: xxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxx.xx Attention: City Clerk, Legislative Services Email: xxxxxx@xxxxxx.xx
British Columbia. (i) Personal Property Security Act (British Columbia) Registration No. / Control No. Current Debtor Current Secured Party Current General Collateral Description and Other Particulars
British Columbia. No person shall obtain from a reporting agency a report…(a) without the express written consent of the consumer, or (b) unless he/she promptly notifies the consumer in writing that a consumer report will be obtained. (The consent may be contained in an application for credit, insurance, employment or tenancy, if it is clearly set forth in type not less than 10 point in size, above the signature of the consumer.)
British Columbia. (For a more detailed discussion on the case and its implications, see my previous article, Death by a Thousand Clearcuts –
British Columbia. (i) General Security Agreement executed by the Corporation in favour of Royal Bank of Canada dated as of June 29, 2001 creating a security interest in the present and future personal property of the Corporation.
