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.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 17

When can environmental regulatory orders be compromised claims under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act? Supreme Court of Canada provides clarification
  • Osler Hoskin & Harcourt LLP
  • Canada
  • December 11 2012

In its decision released on December 7, 2012, the Supreme Court of Canada held that claims in respect of provincial environmental clean-up orders can be compromised under the federal Companies Creditors’ Arrangement Act (CCAA


Ontario Divisional Court confirms that former directors and officers must remediate while order is under appeal
  • Osler Hoskin & Harcourt LLP
  • Canada
  • July 8 2013

On June 19, 2013, in Baker v. Ministry of the Environment, 2013 ONSC 4142 Baker, the Ontario Divisional Court upheld the decision of the Ontario


Ontario Court of Appeal clarifies application of pollution exclusion clauses in commercial general liability policies
  • Osler Hoskin & Harcourt LLP
  • Canada
  • June 30 2011

In ING Insurance Company of Canada v. Miracle (Mohawk Imperial Sales and Mohawk Liquidate), 2011 ONCA 321, the Ontario Court of Appeal held that a “Pollution Liability” exclusion clause in a Commercial General Liability (CGL) insurance policy will apply where the insured participated in an activity that posed a known risk of pollution and environmental damage


Divisional Court affirms the decision of the Environmental Review Tribunal in Kawartha Lakes
  • Osler Hoskin & Harcourt LLP
  • Canada
  • June 1 2012

In its recent decision in The Corporation of the City of Kawartha Lakes v. Director, Ministry of the Environment (Kawartha Lakes) issued on May 28, 2012, the Divisional Court affirmed the reasoning of the Environmental Review Tribunal (the ERT) issued on November 20, 2009 (the ERT Decision


Increase in climate change litigation in US courts could spill over into Canada
  • Osler Hoskin & Harcourt LLP
  • Canada, USA
  • November 23 2009

Climate change litigation is proliferating in the United States


Supreme Court finds abandonment of privacy interest in waste
  • Osler Hoskin & Harcourt LLP
  • Canada
  • May 11 2009

On April 9, 2009, the Supreme Court of Canada issued an important judgment in R.v. Patrick about the abandonment of a person’s privacy interest in waste


The Ontario Environmental Review Tribunal decision in Erickson v. Director, Ministry of Environment
  • Osler Hoskin & Harcourt LLP
  • Canada
  • July 27 2011

The Ontario Environmental Review Tribunal (the ERT) released its landmark ruling in the wind farm challenge case, Erickson v. Director, Ministry of the Environment (Erickson) on July 18, 2011


Environmental Review Tribunal confirms the liability of current and former directors for clean-up orders
  • Osler Hoskin & Harcourt LLP
  • Canada
  • July 27 2011

In its recent decision in Currie v. Director, Ministry of the Environment (Currie) issued on June 7, 2011, the Environmental Review Tribunal (ERT) has applied its reasoning in its Corporation of the City of Kawartha Lakes v. Director, Ministry of Environment decision issued on November 20, 2009 (Kawartha Lakes) to hold corporate directors personally liable to clean up a contaminated site


Daniel Kirby
  • Osler Hoskin & Harcourt LLP