28 February 2024
By Rebecca MangaIn Di Filippo v. Bank of Nova Scotia, 2024 ONCA 33, the Ontario Court of Appeal (“ONCA”) recently clarified when plaintiffs may be permitted to amend their pleadings after the expiry of a limitation period. In this case, the ONCA set aside the order of the motion judge below, who had found the proposed amendments to be statute-barred, and allowed the plaintiffs to plead a new cause of action more than two years after the claim was discovered. The ONCA also allowed other pleading amendments adding new defendants, as the motion judge erred in determining that the claims were discovered against those defendants more than two years before the motion to amend was brought.
12 January 2024
By Harleen BhangooA recent Ontario Court of Appeal decision serves as a cautionary tale to lawyers and their clients who may inadvertently or deliberately gain access to an opposing party’s solicitor-client and litigation privileged information.
28 November 2023
By Kyra BaloghIn a recent decision (Pereira v. TYLT Technologies Inc.), the Ontario Court of Appeal affirmed that courts must look beyond “narrow legalities” and consider the full picture in claims for an oppression remedy.
7 July 2023
By Emily Thompson & Zachary PringleThe Ontario Court of Appeal recently released a pair of decisions considering whether events give rise to a “material change” in the “business, operations or capital” of publicly traded companies, triggering immediate reporting obligations under the Securities Act.
9 March 2023
By Eden KaillFor International Women's Day yesterday, I decided revive my tradition of creating a celebratory collage of all the fabulous women I work with, to post to our social media accounts.
8 November 2022
By Harleen BhangooOn September 26, 2022, the Court of Appeal delivered its judgment in Badesha v. Cronos Group Inc., overruling the lower court’s refusal to grant leave to pursue a proposed claim for alleged misrepresentations in the company’s financial results.
11 October 2022
By Aaron GoldThe Ontario Court of Appeal recently considered the circumstances in which an Ontario court will recognize and enforce the judgment of another Canadian province which has itself recognized and enforced a foreign judgment. H.M.B. is the first Canadian decision considering the availability of “ricochet judgments” at common law, and emphasizes the care claimants must take in selecting the appropriate province(s) to commence recognition and enforcement proceedings.
23 August 2022
By Gush MinhasThe Divisional Court’s decision in Stewart v Demme1 (“Stewart”) is a recent example of the increased scrutiny courts are applying to plaintiffs’ claims in privacy and data breach class proceedings. In this case, the court overturned the certification of a class proceeding against a nurse and a hospital where the nurse had allegedly accessed thousands of patients’ private health records to improperly obtain opioids for personal use.
19 August 2022
By Kyra BaloghArbitration clauses are a common feature in commercial contracts, but parties to contracts and their lawyers should proceed with caution when drafting such clauses to carefully consider whether the clause is an agreement to arbitrate, or an agreement to obtain a professional opinion.
This issue was considered in a recent Ontario Superior Court decision, 2832402 Ontario Inc. v. 2853463 Ontario Inc.(283 Ontario). In that case, the Court held that a clause in a share purchase agreement requiring the parties to submit certain matters to an “independent accountant” constituted an agreement to arbitrate, thereby requiring a stay of a court proceeding commenced by one of the parties.
6 August 2021
By Aaron GoldLast week, the Supreme Court of Canada released its decision in Grant Thornton LLP v. New Brunswick. The judgment provides important guidance on interpreting and applying the basic two-year limitation period contained in most provincial limitations statutes. Ultimately, the Court held that a claim is discovered when the plaintiff has knowledge, actual or constructive, of the material facts upon which a plausible inference of liability on the defendant’s part can be drawn.