Consortium (Meaning of): Difference between revisions

From Riverview Legal Group
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Access restrictions were established for this page. If you see this message, you have no access to this page.
VisualWikitext
mNo edit summary
Line 5: Line 5:


There is also a modern case in the Supreme Court of Canada dealing with consortium and the bases of Ontario jurisdiction:
There is also a modern case in the Supreme Court of Canada dealing with consortium and the bases of Ontario jurisdiction:
::<i>Kungl v. Schiefer, 1962 CanLII 5 (SCC), [1962] S.C.R. 443, 33 D.L.R. (2d) 278<ref name="Kung"/>, on appeal from 1960 CanLII 22 (ON CA), [1961] O.R. 1, 25 D.L.R. (2d) 344 (C.A.)</i><ref name="KunglCA"/>. There the Courts were concerned with whether there existed an action for alienation of affections in Ontario and concluded that there was not. At p. 7 O.R., p. 350 D.L.R., of the Court of Appeal judgment Schroeder, J.A., says:
::<i>Kungl v. Schiefer, 1962 CanLII 5 (SCC), [1962] S.C.R. 443, 33 D.L.R. (2d) 278<ref name="Kungl"/>, on appeal from 1960 CanLII 22 (ON CA), [1961] O.R. 1, 25 D.L.R. (2d) 344 (C.A.)</i><ref name="KunglCA"/>. There the Courts were concerned with whether there existed an action for alienation of affections in Ontario and concluded that there was not. At p. 7 O.R., p. 350 D.L.R., of the Court of Appeal judgment Schroeder, J.A., says:


::<b><u>The term "consortium" is not susceptible of precise or complete definition but broadly speaking, companionship, love, affection, comfort, mutual services, sexual intercourse
::<b><u>The term "consortium" is not susceptible of precise or complete definition but broadly speaking, companionship, love, affection, comfort, mutual services, sexual intercourse

Revision as of 18:55, 16 October 2020


V et al. v. C et al., 1972 CanLII 495 (ON SC)[1]

There is also a modern case in the Supreme Court of Canada dealing with consortium and the bases of Ontario jurisdiction:

Kungl v. Schiefer, 1962 CanLII 5 (SCC), [1962] S.C.R. 443, 33 D.L.R. (2d) 278[2], on appeal from 1960 CanLII 22 (ON CA), [1961] O.R. 1, 25 D.L.R. (2d) 344 (C.A.)[3]. There the Courts were concerned with whether there existed an action for alienation of affections in Ontario and concluded that there was not. At p. 7 O.R., p. 350 D.L.R., of the Court of Appeal judgment Schroeder, J.A., says:
The term "consortium" is not susceptible of precise or complete definition but broadly speaking, companionship, love, affection, comfort, mutual services, sexual intercourse
-- all belonging to the marriage state -- taken together make up what we refer to as consortium.

[1] [2] [4]

References

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 V et al. v. C et al., 1972 CanLII 495 (ON SC), <http://canlii.ca/t/g1c6d>, retrieved on 2020-10-16
  2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 Kungl v. Schiefer, 1962 CanLII 5 (SCC), [1962] SCR 443, <http://canlii.ca/t/1tvr9>, retrieved on 2020-10-16
  3. ↑ Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named KunglCA
  4. ↑ Kungl v. Schiefer, 1960 CanLII 22 (ON CA), <http://canlii.ca/t/1vjnk>, retrieved on 2020-10-16
Retrieved from "https://riverview.legal/encyclopedia/index.php?title=Consortium_(Meaning_of)&oldid=10550"