<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!--Generated by Squarespace Site Server v5.11.5 (http://www.squarespace.com/) on Fri, 30 Jul 2010 08:16:21 GMT--><rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" version="2.0"><channel><title>News &amp; Press</title><link>http://www.branchmacmaster.com/news-and-press/</link><description></description><lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Jul 2010 23:31:14 +0000</lastBuildDate><copyright></copyright><language>en-CA</language><generator>Squarespace Site Server v5.11.5 (http://www.squarespace.com/)</generator><item><title>Court Approves Partial Settlement in Chocolate Conspiracy Claim</title><dc:creator>Branch MacMaster</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 27 Jul 2010 23:20:31 +0000</pubDate><link>http://www.branchmacmaster.com/news-and-press/2010/7/27/court-approves-partial-settlement-in-chocolate-conspiracy-cl.html</link><guid isPermaLink="false">299713:4024654:8380731</guid><description><![CDATA[<p>The Courts in Briitish Columbia and Ontario approved a partial settlement made as between the Plaintiff, Cadbury and ITWAL in a price fixing and price maintenance conspiracy claim. The other defendants, Hershey, Nestle and Mars, have appealed the decisions.</p>
<p>The settlement, if approved, provides for a payment in excess of $5 million, and substantial cooperation in the prosecution of the remaining claims against Hershey, Nestle and Mars.</p>
<p>Ward Branch and Luciana Brasil of Branch MacMaster LLP are counsel for the BC&nbsp;class, together with J.J. Camp Q.C. and Reidar Mogerman, of Camp Fiorante Matthews,&nbsp;and part of a&nbsp;national team assembled to prosecute the claims.</p>
<p>&nbsp;<a href="http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2010/06/11/bc-chocolate-conspiracy-allegation-settlement.html">http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2010/06/11/bc-chocolate-conspiracy-allegation-settlement.html</a></p>]]></description><wfw:commentRss>http://www.branchmacmaster.com/news-and-press/rss-comments-entry-8380731.xml</wfw:commentRss></item><item><title>Primary / Excess Contest Between Insurers</title><dc:creator>Branch MacMaster</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 11 Jun 2010 15:39:17 +0000</pubDate><link>http://www.branchmacmaster.com/news-and-press/2010/6/11/primary-excess-contest-between-insurers.html</link><guid isPermaLink="false">299713:4024654:7950765</guid><description><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.branchmacmaster.com/james-macmaster" target="_blank">Jim MacMaster</a> and <a href="http://www.branchmacmaster.com/paul-miller" target="_blank">Paul Miller</a>&nbsp;succeeded in positioning Branch MacMaster's insurance client as an excess carrier in an action arising out of the collapse of a church floor during a concert. See the &nbsp;B.C. Supreme Court website for the decision in <a href="http://bit.ly/b9hmuZ" target="_blank">Williams v. The B.C. Conference of the Mennonite Brethren Churches, 2010 BCSC 791</a>.</p>]]></description><wfw:commentRss>http://www.branchmacmaster.com/news-and-press/rss-comments-entry-7950765.xml</wfw:commentRss></item><item><title>Supreme Court Holds that Bidding on Trademarks for Keyword Advertising is not Misleading</title><category>google ad words</category><category>keyword advertising</category><dc:creator>Branch MacMaster</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 29 May 2010 03:38:55 +0000</pubDate><link>http://www.branchmacmaster.com/news-and-press/2010/5/28/supreme-court-holds-that-bidding-on-trademarks-for-keyword-a.html</link><guid isPermaLink="false">299713:4024654:7804849</guid><description><![CDATA[<h2>Update:&nbsp;</h2>
<p>Professor Geist recently commented on this decision <a href="http://www.thestar.com/news/sciencetech/technology/lawbytes/article/819889--geist-judge-rules-google-s-keywords-belong-to-top-bidders" target="_blank">here</a>.</p>
<p>In P<em>rivate Career Training Institutions Agency v. Vancouver Career College (Burnaby) Inc.</em>, the Supreme Court of British Columbia held that bidding on a competitor's trade name in connection with keyword advertising is not misleading, and refused to order an injunction to restrain such practice. This was the first decision in Canada on an issue that is receiving increasing attention in the U.S. &nbsp;Luciana Brasil and Ward Branch were counsel for the successful Respondent, Vancouver Career College (Burnaby) Inc.</p>]]></description><wfw:commentRss>http://www.branchmacmaster.com/news-and-press/rss-comments-entry-7804849.xml</wfw:commentRss></item><item><title>CBA Task Force on National Class Actions</title><dc:creator>Branch MacMaster</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 17 May 2010 23:32:25 +0000</pubDate><link>http://www.branchmacmaster.com/news-and-press/2010/5/17/cba-task-force-on-national-class-actions.html</link><guid isPermaLink="false">299713:4024654:7704329</guid><description><![CDATA[<p>Ward Branch appointed to CBA Task Forces studying the problem of overlapping class actions: <a href="http://network.nationalpost.com/NP/blogs/legalpost/archive/2010/03/09/cba-launches-class-action-task-force.aspx">http://network.nationalpost.com/NP/blogs/legalpost/archive/2010/03/09/cba-launches-class-action-task-force.aspx</a></p>]]></description><wfw:commentRss>http://www.branchmacmaster.com/news-and-press/rss-comments-entry-7704329.xml</wfw:commentRss></item><item><title>Arbitration Clauses</title><dc:creator>Branch MacMaster</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 17 May 2010 23:29:30 +0000</pubDate><link>http://www.branchmacmaster.com/news-and-press/2010/5/17/arbitration-clauses.html</link><guid isPermaLink="false">299713:4024654:7704317</guid><description><![CDATA[<p>Ward Branch quoted in Financial Post article on use of arbitration clauses in class actions: see <a href="http://www.financialpost.com/m/story.html?id=2390178&amp;s=Related+Topics&amp;is=Ward%20Branch&amp;it=Person">http://www.financialpost.com/m/story.html?id=2390178&amp;s=Related+Topics&amp;is=Ward%20Branch&amp;it=Person</a></p>]]></description><wfw:commentRss>http://www.branchmacmaster.com/news-and-press/rss-comments-entry-7704317.xml</wfw:commentRss></item><item><title>Supreme Court Clarifies Implied Undertaking Continues to Apply Despite Pre-Trial Motions</title><dc:creator>Branch MacMaster</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 11 May 2010 01:14:31 +0000</pubDate><link>http://www.branchmacmaster.com/news-and-press/2010/5/10/supreme-court-clarifies-implied-undertaking-continues-to-app.html</link><guid isPermaLink="false">299713:4024654:7635979</guid><description><![CDATA[<p>In Bodnar v. The Cash Store Inc., 2010 BCSC 660, &nbsp;the Supreme Court accepted Branch MacMaster's submissions that documents or evidence that are put before the Court in pre-trial motions or are filed by the contrary party remain subject to the implied undertaking of confidentiality. For the first time, the Court established the process to be followed whenever a party proposes to such document or evidence for purposes other than the litigation in which they were generated. The process includes a mandatory leave application when the party proposing to use the material was not the party that filed or used it during the pre-trial motions. Ward Branch and Luciana Brasil were counsel for the defendants in this application.&nbsp;</p>]]></description><wfw:commentRss>http://www.branchmacmaster.com/news-and-press/rss-comments-entry-7635979.xml</wfw:commentRss></item><item><title>Pyramid Scheme Class Action Filed in Federal Court</title><dc:creator>Branch MacMaster</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 08 May 2010 18:56:52 +0000</pubDate><link>http://www.branchmacmaster.com/news-and-press/2010/5/8/pyramid-scheme-class-action-filed-in-federal-court.html</link><guid isPermaLink="false">299713:4024654:7615594</guid><description><![CDATA[<p>On May 4, 2010, Branch MacMaster filed a proposed class action in Federal Court against Business in Motion International Corporation, Alan Kippax and Ashif Mohamed. The claim alleges that the defendants operated an unlawful pyramid scheme and&nbsp;recruited participants by making&nbsp;certain prohibited representations about compensation.</p>
<p>More information is posted on the Plaintiff's Class Actions portion of this site.</p>]]></description><wfw:commentRss>http://www.branchmacmaster.com/news-and-press/rss-comments-entry-7615594.xml</wfw:commentRss></item><item><title>Domain Name Dispute Dismissed in Favour of Vancouver Career College</title><dc:creator>Branch MacMaster</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 03 May 2010 22:09:48 +0000</pubDate><link>http://www.branchmacmaster.com/news-and-press/2010/5/3/domain-name-dispute-dismissed-in-favour-of-vancouver-career.html</link><guid isPermaLink="false">299713:4024654:7525316</guid><description><![CDATA[<p>Luciana Brasil successfuly defended a domain name dispute brought by Vancouver Community College against the Vancouver Career College. The CIRA panel concluded that the domain name <a href="http://www.vccollege.ca">www.vccollege.ca</a> should remain registered in the name of Vancouver Career College's operators. The decision can be found on CIRA's website&nbsp;at <a href="http://www.cira.ca/assets/Uploads/00148-vcollege.ca.pdf">http://www.cira.ca/assets/Uploads/00148-vcollege.ca.pdf</a></p>]]></description><wfw:commentRss>http://www.branchmacmaster.com/news-and-press/rss-comments-entry-7525316.xml</wfw:commentRss></item><item><title>Supreme Court of Canada hears Progressive v. Lombard</title><dc:creator>Branch MacMaster</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 20 Apr 2010 20:42:17 +0000</pubDate><link>http://www.branchmacmaster.com/news-and-press/2010/4/20/supreme-court-of-canada-hears-progressive-v-lombard.html</link><guid isPermaLink="false">299713:4024654:7396901</guid><description><![CDATA[<p>On April 20, 2010, the Supreme Court of Canada heard a general contractor's appeal concerning coverage under a CGL insurance policy issued by Lombard General Ins. Co. of Canada. Lombard was represented before the SCC by <a href="http://www.branchmacmaster.com/ward-branch">Ward Branch</a> and <a href="http://www.branchmacmaster.com/christopher-rhone/">Chris Rhone</a> of Branch MacMaster, together with Michael Sobkin of Ottawa.</p>
<p>A live broadcast of the oral argument is available on the SCC website at the following: <a href="http://tinyurl.com/2vvlc4r">link to webcast</a>.</p>]]></description><wfw:commentRss>http://www.branchmacmaster.com/news-and-press/rss-comments-entry-7396901.xml</wfw:commentRss></item><item><title>BC SPCA Boarding Rates Upheld by B.C. Supreme Court</title><dc:creator>Branch MacMaster</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 29 Mar 2010 22:35:40 +0000</pubDate><link>http://www.branchmacmaster.com/news-and-press/2010/3/29/bc-spca-boarding-rates-upheld-by-bc-supreme-court.html</link><guid isPermaLink="false">299713:4024654:7173320</guid><description><![CDATA[<p>The B.C. Supreme Court has found the B.C. SPCA's boarding rates for seized animals are reasonably charged to owners of seized animals at a rate of $15/day for dogs and $8/day for cats. The B.C. SPCA was represented in Court by <a href="http://www.branchmacmaster.com/christopher-rhone">Chris Rhone</a> of Branch MacMaster. The full decision is available here: <a href="http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/jdb-txt/SC/10/04/2010BCSC0406.htm">Haughton v BC SPCA, 2010 BCSC 406</a>. For CBC News Coverage of the case follow this link: <a href="http://tiny.cc/jv2g1">CBC Article</a>.</p>]]></description><wfw:commentRss>http://www.branchmacmaster.com/news-and-press/rss-comments-entry-7173320.xml</wfw:commentRss></item></channel></rss>