of bias in this specific case". Canadian Supreme Court Enernorth then applied to the Supreme Court of Canada for leave to appeal against the decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal. Before the Supreme Court, Enernorth argued that to recognize judgments such as those from Singapore meant that Canadian judges were "mere functionaries or sheriffs for foreign legal systems, no matter how corrupt they are". Oakwell responded that it was for Canadian courts to decide on this, based on the criteria laid out by the courts. Among other things, it pointed out that Enernorth had neither alleged bias nor contested the Singapore courts' jurisdiction when the case was heard in Singapore. When the case was moved to Canada, two of Enernorth's expert witnesses – including Francis Seow – had admitted they were unaware of any commercial case from Singapore that had been attacked as unfair or biased. On January 18, 2007, Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin and Justices Louise Charron and Marshall Rothstein, sitting in the Supreme Court, dismissed Enernorth's leave application without providing detailed reasons and ordered it to bear the costs of the application. Notes References . ("Oakwell v. Enernorth (C.A.)"). Enernorth Industries Inc. v. Oakwell Engineering Limited 2007 CanLII 1145, Supreme Court (Canada). Further reading . . 2006 in Canadian case law Canadian civil procedure case law Conflict of laws case law Judiciary of Singapore 2006 in Ontario Court of Appeal for Ontario cases