To support us, please follow us wherever you're listening and visit ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠our website⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ to provide feedback.

Jurisdiction — Territorial competence — Real and substantial connection

(0:00:21) Summary
(0:01:14) Reasons for Judgment
(0:01:18) I. Overview
(0:03:44) II. Background
(0:03:46) A. The Notice of Civil Claim
(0:07:29) B. Altria's Jurisdictional Application
(0:07:48) C. Altria's Evidence
(0:10:58) D. The Respondents' Evidence
(0:13:42) E. The Chambers Judgment
(0:16:19) (1) Stage 1 of the Jurisdictional Analysis
(0:19:54) (2) Stage 2 of the Jurisdictional Analysis
(0:21:39) III. On Appeal
(0:22:42) IV. Standard of Review
(0:23:25) V. Analysis
(0:23:27) A. Issue 1: Did the Judge Fail to Consider Materially Relevant Evidence?
(0:24:10) (1) Were the Judge's Reasons Insufficient?
(0:26:26) (2) Did the Judge Ignore or Misconceive Material Evidence?
(0:30:43) B. Issue 2: Did the Judge Incorrectly Apply the Ewert Framework? 
(0:30:47) (1) Did the Judge Reverse the Onus at Stage 1?
(0:36:50) (2) Did the Judge Fail to Address the Different Considerations at Stage 2?
(0:40:08) VI. Disposition