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.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-6 of 6

NFP Q&A: is your letter of intent meeting your intentions?

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • March 19 2014

There are various reasons why organizations enter into letters of intent, memoranda of understanding or engagement letters (collectively referred to

Not-for-profit newsletter - Fall 2013

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • September 12 2013

There are always new things of interest to the NFP and charities law sector and we report on several in this edition of our newsletter

Joint ventures and mergers in the NFP sector

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • June 29 2011

Collaboration and integration are not just buzzwords, they are a reality in the not-for-profit sector

The June 2011 federal Budget updates for the not-for-profit and charity sector

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • June 29 2011

The reality of a majority Conservative government means the measures introduced in Finance Minister Jim Flaherty’s June 2011 Budget are likely to become law

How will the Canada Not-for-Profit Corporations Act impact federal special act corporations?

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • April 29 2011

In 2009, Parliament enacted the Canada Not-for-Profit Corporations Act (Act) to replace the outdated Canada Corporations Act (CCA

The 4th head of charity: what “other purposes beneficial to the community” means in Canada

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • February 28 2011

When an organization seeks charitable status and is refused by the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA), the organization may challenge the CRA’s decision in court