It is common for two parties, particularly in the commercial context, to enter into a contract at one time, but agree to have the contract come into effect at an earlier time. Courts respect the parties' decision to backdate since giving effect to backdating provisions respects the parties' intentions as well as their freedom of contract., 1968 (the date the contract was delivered to the insured).
The Court considered the construction of the whole policy and held that the exclusion clause took effect on the backdated date chosen by the parties.
This practice contravened both the TSX Rules as well as RIM's stock option plan that required options "to be granted at an exercise price not less than the closing price of RIM's common shares on the TSX on the last trading day preceding the date on which the Options are approved for grant".
In summary, backdating is generally permissible where it is done to alter the obligations of the contracting parties only.
Optum Bank is part of the financial services unit of Optum a health and wellness company serving more than 74 million people.
For example, in a company's employees were interested in unionizing.However, it is impermissible where the parties backdate either to unconscionably interfere with the rights of third parties (including the government's right to tax such parties) or where it contravenes applicable rules or legislation.A recent decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal provides a stark reminder that when a partial settlement or other litigation agreement is reached in multi-party litigation, a critical step of disclosure...In addition to misleading a third party, backdating may also be impermissible where it contravenes applicable rules or legislation.For example, in the Ontario Securities Commission found that RIM engaged in improper backdating practices when certain high ranked individuals backdated options to a price that was "in the money".