We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
Lexology logo
  Request new password

McCarthy Tétrault LLP

Offices

  1. Canada

    1. Calgary AB

      Suite 3300, 421 7th Avenue South West, Calgary AB T2P 4KP, Canada T 1 403 260 3500 F 1 403 260 3501
    2. Montreal QC

      1000 de La Gauchetiere West, Suite 2500, Montreal QC H3B 0A2, Canada T 1 514 397 4100 F 1 514 875 6246
    3. Ottawa ON

      The Chambers Siute 1400, 40 Elgin Street, Ottawa ON K1P 5K6, Canada T 1 613 238 2000 F 1 613 563 9386
    4. Quebec QC

      Complex Saint Amable, 1150 de Claire-Fontaine 7 etage, Quebec QC G1R 5G4, Canada T 1 418 521 3000 F 1 418 521 3098
    5. Toronto ON

      Suite 5300 TD Bank Tower, Toronto Dominion Centre 66 Wellington Street West, Toronto ON M5K 1E6, Canada T 1 416 362 1812 F 1 416 868 0673
    6. Vancouver BC

      Suite 1300 Pacific Centre, 777 Dunsmuir Street, Vancouver BC V7Y 1K2, Canada T 1 604 643 7100 F 1 604 643 7900
  2. England

    1. London

      125 Old Broad Street, 26th Floor, London EC2N 1AR, England T 44 20 7 489 5700 F 44 20 7 489 5777
  1. Presto! The UK Supreme Court holds the corporate veil can disappear in Prest v. Petrodel Resources

    Canada, United Kingdom - June 17 2013

    The UK Supreme Court has released an important new judgment addressing the ability of judges to "pierce the corporate veil": Prest v Petrodel

  2. A trap for the unwary the Ontario Court of Appeal addresses the limitation period for contractual indemnification claims

    Canada - June 12 2013

    Imagine the following scenario. Party A contractually agrees to indemnify Party B against claims by third parties. Both Party A and Party B are then

  3. Don’t mess with Texas the Supreme Court of the United States reaffirms deference to administrative tribunals

    Canada, USA - June 17 2013

    In City of Arlington, Texas v. Federal Communications Commission, 569 U.S. (2013), the unanimous Supreme Court of the United States clarified the

  4. Careful how you classify “interns” MOL releases policy statement

    Canada - June 4 2013

    It is a fact of life for some entering the labour market - the unpaid internship. For young workers, it is an opportunity to gain experience in a

  5. Court of Appeal accepts Ontario jurisdiction despite forum selection clause for Germany

    Canada - June 14 2013

    During the spring of 2012, the Canadian Appeals Monitor posted a five-part series on the Supreme Court's judgments in Van Breda, Black, and Éditions

  1. What’s so “special” about a “special committee”?

    Canada, USA - June 18 2013

    In a recent bench ruling in Re Plains Exploration, the Delaware Court held that a special committee was not required to take the lead in merger

  2. This week at the SCC (14062013)

    Canada - June 17 2013

    The Supreme Court of Canada released two judgments and heard one appeal likely to be of interest to Canadian business and professionals. In Edward

  3. Don’t mess with Texas the Supreme Court of the United States reaffirms deference to administrative tribunals

    Canada, USA - June 17 2013

    In City of Arlington, Texas v. Federal Communications Commission, 569 U.S. (2013), the unanimous Supreme Court of the United States clarified the

  4. Presto! The UK Supreme Court holds the corporate veil can disappear in Prest v. Petrodel Resources

    Canada, United Kingdom - June 17 2013

    The UK Supreme Court has released an important new judgment addressing the ability of judges to "pierce the corporate veil": Prest v Petrodel

  5. Court of Appeal accepts Ontario jurisdiction despite forum selection clause for Germany

    Canada - June 14 2013

    During the spring of 2012, the Canadian Appeals Monitor posted a five-part series on the Supreme Court's judgments in Van Breda, Black, and Éditions