Skip to content

Madison Robins listen


Madison* uses her academic background in theology, linguistics and languages to provide a broad perspective in her litigation practice, which includes cases ranging from commercial disputes and insurance matters to criminal and professional liability matters. With her expertise, she steps§ in to provide assistance from the initial stages of a dispute to trials before judge and jury and all the way up to appeals at the Supreme Court of Canada. Madison has the judgment, skill and tenacity to achieve real results. She is always up to the challenge. Already in her emerging practice, Madison has confronted ground-breaking issues in technology, contractual interpretation, civil fraud, professional discipline and constitutional law. .



Madison Robins

is a lawyer at Lenczner Slaght.

"Madison Robins is conscientious and a strong advocate." — Chambers Canada

Madison's litigation practice includes a wide range of commercial disputes and insolvency matters, as well as criminal, securities and professional liability defense. Madison has appeared before all levels of court in Ontario, various administrative and arbitral tribunals, and the Supreme Court of Canada.

Madison received her JD from Osgoode Hall. While at law school, she spent time on her feet as a participant in the Warren Winkler Class Actions Moot, a finalist in the Lenczner Slaght/CBA Gale Cup, and before the Ontario Court of Justice on a constitutional matter. Madison graduated with course prizes in contracts, administrative law, and private international law.

Prior to attending law school, Madison studied ancient religions at McGill University and the University of Toronto. She is proficient in ancient Greek.

Show more
  • Canadian Bar Association

  • Ontario Bar Association - Member-at-Large of the Alternative Dispute Resolution Executive

  • The Advocates' Society

  • Young Commercial Arbitration Practitioners

  • The SCC Leave Project: Predictions for June 10, 2021

    Here’s a look at the leave application decisions that the Supreme Court of Canada will be releasing on June 10, 2021.

    Madison Robins | June 8, 2021

  • Issue-Driven Legal Writing: Not Just for Judges

    Electronic filing, remote discoveries and examinations, and video-conference hearings are some of the ways litigation has adapted to the current COVID-19 emergency. No doubt, some of these new developments will remain once the crisis is over. What is sure to persist, however, is the renewed focus on an old technology: the written word. How can judges and advocates adapt to a system where oral advocacy may no longer be the default mode?

    Madison Robins | May 29, 2020

  • Remote Hearings – Some Practical Considerations

    In recent weeks, the Ontario Superior Court has begun scheduling certain civil hearings to proceed remotely. The Notice to the Profession released on April 2, 2020 and Regional Practice Directions specifically identify pre-trial conferences as being capable of being heard remotely, particularly when settlement is a real possibility. Divisional Court hearings, case conferences and even some contested motions for class actions and matters on the Commercial List and Estates List may also be held.

    Madison Robins | April 20, 2020

  • Shell Game Liability: Recovering Damages in Complex Fraud Cases

    How can an innocent victim recover their losses when a fraudster uses multiple corporations as part of a complex “shell game” to hide and co-mingle misappropriated funds? In DBDC Spadina v Walton, the Ontario Court of Appeal considered a complex multi-real estate transaction investment fraud, perpetrated over an extended period of time with the involvement of numerous corporate actors – all under the control of the fraudster.

    Madison Robins | February 27, 2018

  • Copy and Paste: Avoiding Duplicative Procedures in National Class Actions

    The proliferation of parallel class proceedings in multiple Canadian provinces often defeats the very purpose of class proceedings: the avoidance of a multiplicity of actions. In order to streamline procedures, ensure consistent results, and encourage judicial economy, judges in several provinces have started demanding greater co-ordination among both class counsel and the courts. In McKay v Air Canada, Chief Justice Hinkson took this trend even farther in approving a settlement distribution plan by simply reproducing the reasons of the Ontario Court in Airia Brands v Air Canada.

    Lawrence E. Thacker & Madison Robins | September 28, 2016

Back to top