Purchase This Domain

This domain is a Michael A. Wills domain holdings property and is available for purchase. Contact us or submit your confidential offer to domains at willslaw.ca for consideration and response. Discover more domain properties for sale on our domains for sale listing page.

Quick-check the ahrefs domain rating and link profile: click here.

Minimum offer: $140.00 (USD)

Active Sites Not for Sale

Terminated.Law

Employment lawyer for: wrongful dismissal law

Weclose.Law

Residential real estate lawyer for: residential real estate law

Employer.Law

Management-side employment lawyer for: wrongful dismissal claims

More Top Domains for Sale

Latest Posts from Terminated.Law

Latest Posts from Weclose.Law

  • Ontario Land Transfer Tax and Closing Costs
    by Michael Wills on October 31, 2024

    Learn about Ontario land transfer tax and closing costs. Weclose helps buyers understand LTT, rebates, and expenses for a transparent home-buying experience. The post Ontario Land Transfer Tax and Closing Costs first appeared on Weclose.

  • Calculating Land Transfer Tax in Ontario
    by Michael Wills on October 31, 2024

    Calculating Land Transfer Tax in Ontario: Learn about tax rates, first-time buyer rebates, and closing costs today. Discover exemptions and rebates. The post Calculating Land Transfer Tax in Ontario first appeared on Weclose.

  • Closing Costs for Ontario Homebuyers
    by Michael Wills on October 31, 2024

    Learn about closing costs for Ontario homebuyers with Weclose. From legal fees to title insurance, we guide you through all the expenses for a smooth closing. The post Closing Costs for Ontario Homebuyers first appeared on Weclose.

Recent Decisions from Ontario Court of Appeal

  • R. v. Swaine, 2025 ONCA 313 (CanLII)
    on April 23, 2025

    Criminal procedure — Interveners in criminal applications — Judicial independence — Administration of justice — Applications under ss. 682 and 683 of the Criminal Code — Leave to intervene granted to the Office of the Chief Justice of the Superior Court of Justice and the Ontario Superior Court Judges’ Association — Did the proposed interveners establish that their participation would provide a useful contribution? — Test for granting leave to intervene in criminal mattersCivil procedure — Interveners — Scope of participation — Terms of intervention — Applications under ss. 682 and 683 of the Criminal Code — Interveners permitted to file factums, rely on materials, and make oral submissions — What is the appropriate scope of participation for interveners in criminal applications? — Rule 30 of the Criminal Appeal Rules governs the extent of intervener participationEvidence — Sealing orders — Fresh evidence applications — Criminal procedure — Crown’s application for a sealing order on future materials filed in relation to ss. 682 and 683 applications — Whether r. 27(10) of the Criminal Appeal Rules mandates a sealing order — Application dismissed as r. 27(10) does not apply to the materials in question

  • Integrated Team Solutions PCH Partnership v. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd., 2025 ONCA 297 (CanLII)
    on April 22, 2025

    Civil procedure — Jurisdiction — Forum selection clause — Standard of review — Appellants sought to stay proceedings in Ontario based on lack of jurisdiction or a forum selection clause favoring a French court — Did the motion judge err in concluding Ontario had jurisdiction and declining to enforce the forum selection clause? — Standard of review for jurisdictional rulings and forum selection clauses is palpable and overriding error absent an extricable error of lawEvidence — Jurisdictional analysis — Pleadings and evidence — Appellants argued that the plaintiffs failed to plead sufficient material facts to establish jurisdiction — Did the motion judge err in assessing the sufficiency of the pleadings and evidence? — Jurisdictional analysis requires pleadings to assert core elements of a cause of action and establish a connection to OntarioConstruction — Emergency generators — Alleged catastrophic failure — Claims arose from the failure of emergency generators at a hospital in Ontario — Did the alleged torts occurring in Ontario establish jurisdiction? — Jurisdiction established where the tort occurred in Ontario, including where damage was sustainedContracts — Forum selection clause — Applicability and enforceability — Appellants relied on a forum selection clause in a contract assigning jurisdiction to a French court — Did the motion judge err in finding the clause inapplicable and unenforceable? — Forum selection clauses must be proven valid, clear, enforceable, and applicable to the cause of action

  • Shirodkar v. Coinbase Global, Inc., 2025 ONCA 298 (CanLII)
    on April 22, 2025

    Securities — Disclosure and registration requirements — Class action — Alleged violations of Ontario Securities Act and other provincial securities statutes by failing to meet disclosure and registration requirements for security dealers — Whether crypto rights contracts and tokens constitute securities under the Act — Framework for determining compliance with securities legislation — Securities Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. S.5Contracts — Forum selection clauses — Interpretation of Canadian User Agreement — Whether forum selection clause in Canadian User Agreement retroactively conferred jurisdiction over non-Canadian respondents — Standard of review for interpretation of standard form contracts — Governing law and jurisdiction clauses — Principles from Ledcor Construction Ltd. v. Northbridge Indemnity Insurance CoCivil procedure — Jurisdiction simpliciter — Real and substantial connection test — Application of Van Breda framework — Whether accessing a global online platform from Ontario constitutes a presumptive connecting factor — Rebuttal of presumptive connecting factors — Principles from Club Resorts Ltd. v. Van Breda, 2012 SCC 17Civil procedure — Forum non conveniens — Discretionary stay of proceedings — Whether Ireland is the more appropriate forum for adjudicating claims — Consideration of comity, judicial resources, and risk of conflicting decisions — Loss of juridical advantage due to absence of class action regime in Ireland — Principles from Kaynes v. BP, p.l.c., 2014 ONCA 580