Gustavo, you may or may not be overreading the Court’s attitude toward Chevron. My feeling is it’s probably a mistake to draw any conclusions from the opinion’s amusing “your wish is granted” language. I think the jurisdictional point is significant, but I am not sure it is particularly aimed at Chevron or at multinational companies. I think it would be a good thing if courts agreed that once a judgment exists, defenses such as forum non conveniens, want of personal jurisdiction, etc., generally will fall by the wayside. Of course, now the LAPs, having won the right to have the court decide, need to persuade the court that their judgment is entitled to recognition and enforcement in Ontario!