Professional Liability and Regulation

Public and Administrative

Securities Litigation

Practice Contacts

Our Blog

  • The interaction between a government’s statutory obligation and a common law duty of care can be a difficult area to navigate in negligence claims. In Williams v Toronto, the Ontario Court of Appeal held that, on the facts of that case, the failure of the City of Toronto to fulfil a statutory obligation was civilly actionable by residents.  In so doing, the Court provides further guidance as to what surrounding circumstances can push such failures into the realm of negligence.

    September 21, 2016
  • Yesterday’s decision from the Supreme Court of Canada in Wilson v. AECL will no doubt generate (and has already generated: e.g. here, here) significant commentary.

    July 15, 2016
  • An interlocutory injunction is a valuable tool to maintain the status quo between parties, pending the resolution of litigation.  Most disputes over whether an interlocutory injunction should be granted will depend on whether there will be “irreparable harm” if an injunction is not granted.  However, as Guelph Taxi v Guelph Police Service shows, it is also critical that the party seeking an injunction give a meaningful undertaking to pay damages if the injunction is granted but the party is ultimately unsuccessful.

    July 8, 2016
  • Misfeasance in public office is a difficult claim to prove. A successful action requires plaintiffs to demonstrate that a public officer engaged in deliberate misconduct knowing that such misconduct was likely to cause harm to the plaintiff. In many cases, evidence of the requisite mental element is lacking.

    June 9, 2016
  • The Liquor Control Board of Ontario has lost a protracted dispute with the Information and Privacy Commissioner (IPC) over its right to collect the personal information of wine club members in the recent case of Liquor Control Board of Ontario v. Vin De Garde Wine Club, 2015 ONSC 2537.

    May 27, 2015
  • Relief from campaign finance rules may not be hard to come by if the wrongdoing was done in good faith. In Obina v. City of Ottawa, aspiring city councillor Lilly Obina was granted relief from penalty, despite contravening rules under the Municipal Elections Act (MEA) regarding the filing of financial statements for her 2010 campaign.

    September 12, 2014
close