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:1-9 of 9

The SCC considers who bears the risk of a fraudulent cheque: the drawer or the bank?
  • Osler Hoskin & Harcourt LLP
  • Canada
  • November 1 2017

In Teva Canada Ltd. v. TD Canada Trust, the Supreme Court of Canada clarified the “fictitious” or “non-existent” payee defence to the


Law Commission gathers data on class action effectiveness
  • Osler Hoskin & Harcourt LLP
  • Canada
  • January 8 2015

One year ago today, the Law Commission of Ontario (LCO) released the list of issues to be considered by its Class Actions Advisory Group. As we noted


Is contractual interpretation a common issue?
  • Osler Hoskin & Harcourt LLP
  • Canada
  • August 26 2014

Canadian courts routinely certify the interpretation of contracts as common issues in class actions. Following the Supreme Court of Canada's recent


Supreme Court of Canada limits the right to appeal commercial arbitral decisions on issues of contractual interpretation
  • Osler Hoskin & Harcourt LLP
  • Canada
  • August 5 2014

In Sattva Capital Corp. v. Creston Moly Corp., 2014 SCC 53 (Sattva), released August 1, 2014, the Supreme Court of Canada overturned the historical


Federal Court of Appeal rules that class proceedings under the Competition Act can be stayed on the basis of an arbitration clause
  • Osler Hoskin & Harcourt LLP
  • Canada
  • March 5 2013

The Federal Court of Appeal recently issued an important ruling in respect of the application of arbitration clauses to private actions and class


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).


Employees have a reasonable expectation of privacy in work computers: Supreme Court of Canada
  • Osler Hoskin & Harcourt LLP
  • Canada
  • October 22 2012

In R. v. Cole, 2012 SCC 53 (October 19, 2012), the Supreme Court of Canada held that employees may reasonably expect privacy in the information stored on their work-issued computers at least where personal use is permitted or reasonably expected.


Supreme Court of Canada revamps the test for jurisdiction over foreign defendants
  • Osler Hoskin & Harcourt LLP
  • Canada
  • April 19 2012

In a recently released pair of cases, Club Resorts Ltd. v. Van Breda and Club Resorts Ltd. v. Charron the Supreme Court of Canada has updated and clarified the “real and substantial connection test” that Canadian courts must apply to determine whether they have jurisdiction over foreign and out-of-province defendants.