Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- Absent Declarants (1)
- Anti-suit injunctions (1)
- Arbitration (1)
- Commercial Law (1)
- Comparative Law (1)
-
- Conflict of Laws (1)
- Conflict of laws (1)
- Confrontation Clause (1)
- Crawford v. Washington (1)
- Enforcement (1)
- Evidence Rules (1)
- Foreign judgments (1)
- Hearsay Exception (1)
- International Commercial Arbitration (1)
- International Commercial Law (1)
- International Law (1)
- Jurisdiction (1)
- Jury (1)
- Lis pendens (1)
- Nonhearsay (1)
- Parallel proceedings (1)
- Practice and Procedure (1)
- Private international law (1)
- Proof (1)
- Recognition (1)
- Supreme Court of Canada (1)
- Testimonial Hearsay (1)
- Unintended Assertions (1)
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Conflict of Laws
Recent Private International Law Developments Before The Supreme Court Of Canada, Antonin I. Pribetic
Recent Private International Law Developments Before The Supreme Court Of Canada, Antonin I. Pribetic
Antonin I. Pribetic
A trilogy of interesting cases involving private international law recently wended their way to the Supreme Court of Canada: (1) King v. Drabinsky (an Ontario case addressing the applicability of the Charter in respect of the enforcement of a foreign judgment); (2) Teck Cominco Metals Ltd. v. Lloyd's Underwriters (a British Columbia case involving declaratory relief in the context of parallel proceedings and forum non conveniens); and (3) Yugraneft v. Rexx Management Corporation (an Alberta case which affirmed that the two-year limitation period under s.3 of Alberta's Limitations Act, governs when a party seeks the recognition and enforcement in Alberta …
Case For A Constitutional Definition Of Hearsay: Requiring Confrontation Of Testimonial, Nonassertive Conduct And Statements Admitted To Explain An Unchallenged Investigation, The, James L. Kainen, Carrie A. Tendler
Case For A Constitutional Definition Of Hearsay: Requiring Confrontation Of Testimonial, Nonassertive Conduct And Statements Admitted To Explain An Unchallenged Investigation, The, James L. Kainen, Carrie A. Tendler
Faculty Scholarship
Crawford v. Washington’s historical approach to the confrontation clause establishes that testimonial hearsay inadmissible without confrontation at the founding is similarly inadmissible today, despite whether it fits a subsequently developed hearsay exception. Consequently, the requirement of confrontation depends upon whether an out-of-court statement is hearsay, testimonial, and, if so, whether it was nonetheless admissible without confrontation at the founding. A substantial literature has developed about whether hearsay statements are testimonial or were, like dying declarations, otherwise admissible at the founding. In contrast, this article focuses on the first question – whether statements are hearsay – which scholars have thus far …