[Ws2-jurisdiction] Pool.com case summary

[Bernard Turcotte]

Re Quebec = correct.

B.

On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 9:49 AM, Nigel Roberts <nigel at channelisles.net>
wrote:

> For the avoidance of imprecision or possible confusion, with (most of)
> Canada being a common-law, and not a civil law jurisdiction, I submit that
> governing law should, for preference, might better be expressed simply as
> "Canadian Law" or perhaps "British Columbia law".
>
> These were, of course, civil *proceedings*, under Canadian law but that's
> not civil law. (I think Quebec has a civilian system, however?)
>
>
>
>
> On 03/04/17 14:29, Mathieu Weill wrote:
>
>> Dear Colleagues,
>>
>> Here is another summary form for the Pool.com vs ICANN case. It’s an
>> interesting case  because it was the only one documented as submitted in
>> front of a non-US court. However it was settled before it reached the
>> decision stage.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> --
>> *****************************
>> Mathieu WEILL
>> AFNIC - directeur général
>> Tél: +33 1 39 30 83 06
>> mathieu.weill at afnic.fr <mailto:mathieu.weill at afnic.fr>
>> Twitter : @mathieuweill
>> *****************************
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list
>> Ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction
>>
>> _______________________________________________
> Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list
> Ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ws2-jurisdiction/attachments/20170403/3a5b0964/attachment.html>