Over the last decade the law of judicial jurisdiction has undergone profound changes in Canada. Chief among the factors that prompted evolution is the recognition of fairness as a guiding principle in the elaboration of jurisdictional rules. This thesis presents the consequences such recognition has already had and should have on the granting of freezing measures, those specific provisional measures aimed at freezing a defendant's assets pending litigation. / Having reviewed the freezing measures that can be obtained from Canadian courts, this thesis shows how concerns of fairness to the parties have questioned traditional grounds of jurisdiction and how it has affected the very availability of freezing measures. However, out of concerns of fairness to the plaintiff, Canadian courts with no jurisdiction to hear the merits of a dispute should be ready to assert jurisdiction for the limited purpose of freezing assets. / Finally, turning to the scope of those measures, this thesis deals with the issue of extraterritoriality. It is argued that out of concerns of fairness to innocent third parties courts should be extremely cautious in granting extraterritorial measures.

No description available.