People

Services

Industries

Firm

About

Knowledge

Careers

News

Events

Contact

Connect

Privacy Policy

Manage Cookies

Disclaimer

Terms of Use

Accessibility

Payments

Legal

Calgary

Toronto

Edmonton

Ottawa

Vancouver

New York

Montréal

Lincoln Caylor

Commercial Litigation and Fraud Lawyer

Partner 

Nathan J. Shaheen

Commercial Disputes and Financial Crimes Lawyer

Partner

Dylan A. Gallant

Commercial Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Associate

The federal government recently introduced <a href="https://www.parl.ca/DocumentViewer/en/45-1/bill/C-2/first-reading">Bill C-2</a>, which is known as the Strong Borders Act. It maintains certain proposed amendments to the <a href="https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/sc-2000-c-17/latest/sc-2000-c-17.html">Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act</a> (the "PCMLTFA") introduced in the prior government's 2024 Fall Economic Statement and proposes various additional amendments.

The Strong Borders Act Seeks to Strengthen the Canadian AML Regime

The Strong Borders Act Seeks to Strengthen the Canadian Anti-Money Laundering Regime

Lincoln Caylor and Nathan J. Shaheen explore the evolving evidentiary threshold for Mareva injunctions in Canada in the Q2 2025 issue of Chambers Digest.

Chancery Lanes Chambers Digest

Mareva Injunctions in Canada: Now Easier to Get?

The recent <a rel="noopener noreferrer" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://budget.canada.ca/update-miseajour/2024/report-rapport/FES-EEA-2024-en.pdf" target="_blank">Fall Economic Statement</a> announced the Liberal government’s intention to materially increase the financial (and other) penalties faced by designated individuals and entities doing business in Canada (known as “reporting entities”) that fail to meet the requirements of Canada’s anti-money laundering (AML) regime. While the duration of the Liberal government’s remaining time in power is uncertain, the approach to AML of any Conservative government is unlikely to be less demanding. This is particularly true given the upcoming Mutual Evaluation of Canada by the Financial Action Task Force, which will assess the effectiveness of Canada’s AML regime regardless of the political party in power.

Canada Announces Significantly Increased Penalties for Money Laundering Failures

Sophia DiNicolo

Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Associate 

In its recent decision in <a rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://canlii.ca/t/k6rj7" target="_blank">Ingram v Kulynych Estate</a>, the Court of Appeal for Ontario clarified the timeline for bringing equitable trust claims against estates, concluding that such claims are subject to the two-year limitation period outlined in s. 38(3) of the Trustee Act, rather than the 10-year limitation period under s. 4 of the Real Property Limitations Act. The decision also affirmed the analytical framework for determining which statutory limitation provision applies.

Ontario Court of Appeal Clarifies Limitation Period for Equitable Trust Claims Against Estates

Ontario's Court of Appeal Clarifies Limitation Period for Equitable Trust Claims Against Estates

J. Sébastien A. Gittens

Technology Lawyer & Trademark Agent

Tech & Data, National Practice Group Leader 

Suzie Suliman

Commercial Transactions Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Associate, Trademark Agent

Kees de Ridder

Technology, IP & Privacy Lawyer | Patents, Licensing & Cyber

Partner, Patent Agent, Trademark Agent

The Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada has released draft guidance outlining best practices for organizations to assess the privacy practices of third-party service providers under PIPEDA. The guidance emphasizes that privacy due diligence is an ongoing accountability obligation, with particular attention to data flows, AI and training data, security, subcontractors, international transfers and data retention.

OPC Issues New PIPEDA Guidance on Assessing Third-Party Service Providers

Ashley M. White

Corporate & Commercial Transactions Lawyer | Power & Energy

Martin Ignasiak KC

Energy & Industrial Projects Lawyer

Head of Energy Regulatory

Nathan Murray

Energy Regulatory, Environmental & Administrative Lawyer

Canada has amended the Physical Activities Regulations to remove certain intraprovincial energy projects and Canada Energy Regulator-regulated facilities from the federal Impact Assessment Act Project List. The changes are intended to reduce regulatory duplication, timelines and costs while providing greater certainty for proponents, while other federal environmental and emissions requirements remain applicable.

Government of Canada Reduces the Scope of the Project List under the Impact Assessment

Government of Canada Reduces the Scope of the Project List under the Impact Assessment Act

Jessica Kennedy

Regulatory Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

Jennifer (Jenn) K. Choi

Commercial Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Vancouver

On July 15, 2026, British Columbia and Simpcw First Nation entered into a consent-based decision-making agreement under the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act (DRIPA) for the environmental assessment of the Yellowhead Copper Project. The Agreement requires Simpcw consent for the project to proceed and establishes a framework for parallel provincial and Indigenous environmental assessments. Its potential application to future mining projects in Simpcw&rsquo;s traditional territory highlights the evolving role of Indigenous consent in major resource development projects in British Columbia.

BC Signs DRIPA Consent Agreement Requiring Simpcw Consent for Yellowhead Copper Project

BC Signs DRIPA Agreement Requiring Simpcw Consent for Yellowhead Copper Project

Katherine Booth

Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Vancouver

The BC Court of Appeal in Cleaver v. The Cadillac Fairview Corporation Limited upheld the refusal to certify a privacy class action, finding no basis in fact for the claim&rsquo;s central allegation. The decision reinforces the courts&rsquo; gatekeeping role at certification and the importance of evidentiary support for the core allegations underlying a proposed class proceeding.

BC Court of Appeal No basis in fact no class action

BC Court of Appeal: No Basis in Fact = No Class Action 

Michael C. Smith

Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

George W. H. Reid

International Trade, Investment and Public Procurement Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

The Government of Canada has published a new Notice concerning the rules and procedures governing the administration of the quota for imports of electric vehicles from the People's Republic of China for the second period of Quota Year 1 (September 1, 2026 to February 28, 2027). The Notice, issued by Global Affairs Canada under the Export and Import Permits Act, confirms that the second allocation period will continue to operate similar to the first allocation period.&nbsp;

Practice Alert: UK court accepts jurisdiction in hotly-contested Russian dispute

From the Same Authors