Expertise
-
Practice Areas:
Bar Admissions:
Education:
- University of Toronto (2007) JD
- McGill University (2003) B.Eng. (Mechanical Engineering)
Details
- Bio
- Cases
- Associations
- Blog Posts
- News & Media
- Publications & Presentations
- Recognition
Andrew Parley
Andrew's practice spans a diverse range of industries from securities and finance to energy to construction, infrastructure, and logistics. Focusing on commercial litigation matters, he represents individuals, and business of all sizes. As a mechanical engineer by training, Andrew has a strong understanding of engineering and construction project management.
Some of the clients that Andrew has represented include BMO Nesbitt Burns, British Energy, 407 ETR, TMX Group Inc., McDonalds Restaurants of Canada Limited, SNC Lavalin Inc., Sears Canada, and the Government of Canada. He has appeared before the Ontario Superior Court, the Ontario Divisional Court, the Ontario Court of Appeal, the Supreme Court of Canada as well as various administrative tribunals. Andrew has also been involved in several private, local and international arbitrations.
-
-
2373480 Ontario Inc v Digreen Homes Vaughan Inc
Counsel to a land developer and home builder in connection with a dispute relating to a large residential community development.
-
Tiger Calcium Services Inc v Clark Sazwan
Counsel to the Plaintiff, Parallel49 in an Alberta action relating to alleged misrepresentations during the purchase and sale of a calcium chloride plant.
-
North Elgin Centre Inc v McDonald’s Restaurants of Canada
Counsel to the Appellant, McDonald’s, on a successful appeal at the Ontario Court of Appeal over the renewal of a commercial lease.
-
Counsel for Mayor of Caledon in an application brought pursuant to the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act, which resulted in all allegations being dismissed.
-
Counsel to a defendant cell phone manufacturer in a proposed class proceeding alleging that cellular phones designed, manufactured, and sold by various defendants emit excessive amounts of radiation that allegedly causes adverse health effects.
-
Counsel to a family physician in the successful defence at trial of the decision to discharge a patient from hospital, following which the patient sustained a fall.
-
McAllister v 1537768 Ontario Inc
Counsel to General Electric in product liability proceedings relating to light bulbs alleged to have caused a fire at a marina.
-
Dow v 407 ETR Concession Company Limited
Counsel to the defendant 407 ETR in a class action relating to the use of the statutory licence plate denial remedy in relation to insolvent individuals.
-
Steelcon Fabrication v City of Oshawa
Counsel to a steel manufacturer in a successful hearing before the Building Code Commission.
-
The Advocates' Society
-
Canadian Bar Association
-
Ontario Bar Association
-
Pro Bono Law Ontario
-
Law Help Ontario
-
Class actions against investment advisors? Don’t bet on it
Class actions are common in the financial services sector. The relatively low bar for certification of such claims as class proceedings means that many such claims are certified. Yet certification is by no means automatic: where the litigation will not be significantly advanced through the resolution of common issues, courts will typically be reluctant to certify an action as a class proceeding.
-
Partial Summary Judgement: a tool used to simplify
In Bisquip Leasing Corporation v Coco Paving Inc, Bisquip Leasing Corporation [“Bishop”] brought a motion for summary judgment against Coco Paving Inc. [“Coco”] for unpaid invoices on various projects. Coco asserted a counterclaim against Bishop arising out of “deficient work” and an incident in which a gas line was allegedly struck by Bishop during excavation.
-
Settlement in multi-party litigation is to be encouraged, as confirmed by the Supreme Court of Canada in Sable Offshore Energy Inc v Ameron International Corp. One common mechanism for achieving settlements in multi-party litigation is through what is commonly known as a Pierringer agreement. A Pierringer agreement allows the settling defendants to be released from the lawsuit with the non-settling defendants left exposed to their proportionate share of liability. Despite their popularity, the impact of a Pierringer Agreement on the remaining defendants and the continuing litigation is not always clear.
-
Can an employee refuse reinstatement and still claim damages for wrongful dismissal?
It is well established that an employee who has been dismissed from his or her position has a duty to mitigate their damages by seeking reemployment. The central question is whether a reasonable person in the employee's position would have accepted the offer of employment.
-
Bankruptcy won't shield debtor from Court's contempt powers
A fundamental purpose of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. B-3 (the "Act") is the financial rehabilitation of the "honest but unfortunate" debtor. One way that this purpose is achieved is through the automatic stay of proceedings granted under section 69(1)(a) of the Act.
-
Best Lawyers in Canada Recognizes Lenczner Slaght with 100 Rankings
In the latest edition of Best Lawyers in Canada, 28 Lenczner Slaght lawyers earned a total of 100 rankings, up from 86 in 2019.
-
Benchmark Recognizes Four Lenczner Slaght Partners
Benchmark Litigation has recognized four Lenczner Slaght partners among the most talented litigators under the age of 40.
-
Benchmark Canada Highlights Lenczner Slaght’s Litigation Excellence
Benchmark Canada 2019 not only recognizes Canada’s leading litigation firm with the top tier ranking of “Highly Recommended in Ontario”, 17 Lenczner Slaght litigators are also ranked for their expertise.
-
Lenczner Slaght Partners Featured in Latest Benchmark Recognitions
Benchmark Canada has recognized six Lenczner Slaght partners as the most talented litigators under 40 and two partners recognized as two of the top female litigators in Canada.
-
Lenczner Slaght Receives Top Tier Ranking in Benchmark Litigation
19 Lenczner Slaght leading litigators are ranked in Benchmark Litigation's 2018 directory, including 7 new additions since last year. Three of the firm's litigation stars are also recognized as a Top 50 Trial Lawyer in Canada.
-
McDonald’s lease dispute highlights need for reasonable notice in revocation of waiver
Andrew Parley is quoted in the Lawyer's Daily article McDonald’s lease dispute highlights need for reasonable notice in revocation of waiver on February 6, 2018. Andrew comments on the recent Ontario Court of Appeal decision in North Elgin Centre Inc v McDonald's Restaurants of Canada Limited. Andrew, Ronald Slaght, and Margaret Robbins are counsel for McDonald's.
-
Seven Lenczner Slaght Partners Named in Benchmark’s Under 40 Hotlist 2017
Benchmark Litigation has recognized seven Lenczner Slaght partners as the most promising emerging talent in their respective fields.
-
Ontario Superior Court of Justice dismisses all allegations against the Mayor of Caledon in an application brought pursuant to the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act.
-
Lenczner Slaght Welcomes Four New Partners
Canada’s leading litigation practice promotes four associates.
-
Curry sees "very dramatic shift" in handling of paramountcy law
Tom Curry and Andrew Parley were quoted in The Lawyers Weekly on November 27, 2015.
-
Managing the Cost, Risk, and Disruption of E-Discovery in Complex Litigation
Andrew Parley moderated the CCCA webinar on complex e-discovery projects. He shared his expertise on the best practices for successfully managing these projects, which can be long, complicated, expensive, and disruptive to the business.
-
Benchmark Litigation (2017-2019)
Under 40 Hotlist
-
Benchmark Canada (2018-2019)
Future Star - General Commercial, Securities
-
Best Lawyers in Canada (2020)
Health Care Law