Very often, business people think that a contract can not legally exist unless it is in the form of writing. In other words, according to them, nothing can engage them if they have not previously signed a paper in good and due form. In the same vein, these people believe they can say anything or nearly so at their business relationships: nothing is written no contract! Well Think again … The Case: In 1990, the Quebec Superior Court issued a very importantverdict in the case of Renzo Prudentia vs. Bache Securities Canada ltd et al. In this case, the applicant Renzo continued that brokerage and its representative in damages as a result of losses incurred by the Exchange.. After the representative in question had endured against a tight-examination from the lawyer Renzo, it asked the Court for leave to hear the telephone recording of a conversation which took place between the representative and Renzo itself. For registration, the applicant wanted to attack the credibility of representative and confirm the fact that certain representations had been made. Of course, the defendant whose telephone connection had been collected without his prior object categorically to this request.. The verdict: In its judgment, the judge stressed at the outset that the civil courts had on several occasions accepted into evidence a telephone recording of a conversation, however, asking some of the eligibility criteria (registration is free of coercion, accurate representation words spoken and no doubt about the identity of the person whose voice was captured). On the other hand, he pointed out that recording by the applicant for a telephone conversation with the defendant, even without the knowledge of the latter, did not violate the criminal law. Then he said that the Canadian Charter did not apply to a civil dispute between individuals. Finally, it ruled that the Tribunal had to worry about finding the truth and this, so absolutely essential: . The Court finds that the recording of a telephone conversation between people with a business relationship is admissible in evidence in a case arising out of this business relationship.” By the way, always in 1990, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that the recording of a telephone conversation was not illegal if either of the parties to the conversation was aware of the registration. . These judgments and several other thus highlight the principle that the end justifies the means. La The search for truth is therefore provide modern tools (a tape recorder, for example) that receive the blessing of the courts. ? Will it take as much distrust everyone? Normally, the one who told the truth should not be afraid that his words are recorded, even without his knowledge … Qu bec: Quebec’s Civil Code contains specific provisions regarding the elements and evidence: A“The proof of any fact relevant to the case is admissible and may be made by all means.” The court has its own motion, dismiss any evidence obtained under conditions that violate the fundamental rights and freedoms and the use of which could bring the administration of justice …” In 1995, the Superior Court ruled that the registration by a mother of a telephone conversation between her minor child (which she had custody) and his father was admissible in evidence, the circumstances so that Article 2858 CCQ did not receive any application.
disclaimer
The information presented above is general in nature and is available to you without any collateral notably at its accuracy or its obsolescence. This information should not be interpreted as constituting one or advice or legal opinions.SIf you need legal advice, please consult a lawyer or notary.
Filed under: Uncategorized | Tagged: Business, Business Tips, Contract, contract laws, court, justice, law, managment, telephone conversations, Telephone Recording, writen | Leave a Comment »
eToro’s forex software on is targeting to serve 
Free 
