- Ontario (2014)
- University of Ottawa (2013) JD
- Norman Paterson School of International Affairs, Carleton University (2013) MA
- University of Victoria (2008) BA (Honours - History)
Lars' varied litigation practice includes commercial disputes, professional liability matters, public law litigation, and class actions. He has represented clients at all levels of court in Ontario, the Federal Court of Canada, and numerous administrative tribunals.
Before joining Lenczner Slaght, Lars was a litigator at the Department of Justice, where he represented the Attorney General of Canada and federal government departments in constitutional litigation, contract and tort matters, class actions, and judicial review proceedings. Lars has helped clients navigate high-profile complex litigation and has advised clients through sensitive matters requiring discreet legal assistance.
Lars earned a joint JD/MA (International Affairs) from the University of Ottawa and Carleton University, where he served as Editor-in-Chief of the Ottawa Law Review and Assistant Editor of the Paterson Review of International Affairs. During law school, Lars completed studies at Tel Aviv University and earned various advocacy awards as a member of championship moot court, negotiation, and mediation competition teams.
Counsel to the plaintiffs in an action relating to the design and construction of a data centre.
Counsel to the defendant Imperial Metals Corporation in a class action relating to alleged breaches of the Securities Act in connection with a breach of the tailings storage facility at the Mount Polley Mine.
Counsel to a manufacturer of biogas engine in a product liability proceeding.
Canadian Bar Association
The Advocates' Society
Does the director of a corporation owe a common law duty of care to that corporation’s security holders? The prevailing view has been that directors do not owe a duty of care to a corporation’s investors. However, the Ontario Superior Court in Poole v Phillips determined that the answer to this question is not clear enough to permit summary dismissals of such negligence claims. In Poole, the Court refused the Defendants’ motion for summary judgement, holding that a negligence claim brought by investors against a corporation’s directors disclosed a genuine issue requiring trial.
In Ontario, if a product harms consumers, a manufacturer may apologize without risk of the apology being used as an admission of liability in subsequent civil proceedings. Indeed, Ontario’s Apology Act expressly protects defendants from their apology being used in a determination of fault or liability.
This article, co-authored by Nina Bombier and Lars Brusven, appeared in the Insurance Law Focus Section of the March 24, 2017 issue of The Lawyers Weekly. This article discussed how the court deals with allocating costs between an insured and the insurer when losses extend over a long period of time or not all claims are covered by the insurance policy.