People

Services

Industries

Firm

About

Knowledge

Careers

News

Events

Contact

Connect

Privacy Policy

Disclaimer

Terms of Use

Accessibility

Payments

Legal

Calgary

Toronto

Edmonton

Ottawa

Vancouver

New York

Montréal

Melanie L. Aitken

Antitrust & Competition Law Advisor

Managing Principal, Bennett Jones (US) LLP

Cheryl M. Woodin

Commercial Litigation, Product Liability & Class Actions Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Partner

Emrys Davis

Commercial Litigation, Competition and Class Action Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

In Martin v. Alphabet, the Competition Tribunal issued its first decision interpreting the new public-interest pathway for private access under section 103.1(7) of the Competition Act. While affirming an intention to broaden access, the Tribunal articulated a flexible but rigorous three-part framework that places real weight on evidence, genuine interest and the applicant&rsquo;s capacity to prosecute complex competition cases. The decision underscores that public interest alone is insufficient without a coherent, Canada-focused evidentiary record and a credible litigation plan.

Martin v Alphabet Tribunal

Martin v. Alphabet: Tribunal Sets the Public Interest Leave Framework—Evidence and Capacity Now the Gatekeepers

Sarah E. Gilbert

Regulatory, Environmental and Health and Safety Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Gatlin Smeijers

Environmental Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Julia E. Schatz

Commercial & Regulatory Lawyer | Environmental & Agribusiness

Partner 

On June 5, 2025, the Competition Bureau (the Bureau) published its <a rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://competition-bureau.canada.ca/en/how-we-foster-competition/education-and-outreach/publications/environmental-claims-and-competition-act#sec02-2" target="_blank">final Guidelines for environmental claims</a> under the Competition Act (the Act). The Guidelines were created to help businesses and the public understand the Bureau's approach to deceptive marketing provisions under the Act as they relate to environmental claims, including with respect to the new environment-specific provisions that were enacted in 2024. While not binding on the Commissioner of Competition nor the Competition Tribunal, the Guidelines provide visibility into the Bureau's interpretation and approach to environmental claims.

Final Guidelines From the Competition Bureau on Environmental Claims in Canada

Final Guidelines from the Competition Bureau on Environmental Claims in Canada

Michael A. Eizenga L.S.M.

Leading Canadian Class Action Litigator at Bennett Jones Toronto

Gannon Beaulne

Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

In our 2025 edition of Looking Forward, we review notable class action developments from the past year and consider what recent trends in the law might tell us about what to expect in the years ahead.

Class Actions Looking Forward 2025

Class Actions: Looking Forward 2025

Mercy Liu

Competition and Antitrust Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Associate

Since 2022, the Government of Canada has substantially amended the Competition Act each year for three successive years. Among the many changes are a collection of related amendments which aim to expand access to the Competition Tribunal to private litigants. New remedies become available in June 2025 and will create significant financial incentives for private plaintiffs to litigate at the Tribunal, including in a quasi-class action on behalf of all persons affected by the respondent’s alleged anti-competitive conduct. Beginning in June 2025, we anticipate plaintiffs will file new cases—at first perhaps only a trickle rather than a flood—as they test the procedural rules that the Tribunal will apply to these cases.

Competition Act Amendments Open Door to Quasi Class Actions

Natalia E. Iamundo

Commercial Real Estate Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Benjamin K. Reingold

Intellectual Property Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

Ahmed Elmallah

Intellectual Property Lawyer at Bennett Jones Edmonton

Counsel, Patent Agent, Trademark Agent

Proptech is transforming the real estate sector through technologies such as AI, IoT and data-driven platforms. This blog examines recent Canadian patent filing trends, emerging litigation and key IP considerations for companies developing or adopting proptech solutions.

Prop Tech Patents And Patent Litigation

Proptech: Patents and Patent Litigation

Samuel Judson

Craig R. R. Garbe

Commercial Real Estate Lawyer | Funds, REITs & JV Deals

Rights of first refusal (ROFRs) can significantly affect Canadian commercial real estate transactions, particularly when properties are sold as part of a portfolio. This blog reviews limited Canadian case law addressing when ROFRs are triggered in portfolio sales and the challenges they create for vendors and purchasers. It also outlines practical structuring strategies to help navigate these complex transactions.

Rights of First Refusal in Canadian Commercial Real Estate

Rights of First Refusal in Canadian Commercial Real Estate: Navigating Portfolio ROFRs

Simon P. Crawford

Leading Commercial Real Estate Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Vanessa Kiraly

In Oliva v. Dickson (2025 ONSC 6666), the Ontario Superior Court confirmed that Building Code compliance can be an implied term of an Agreement of Purchase and Sale and a basis for vendor-builder liability in negligence. Even without structural failure or express contractual representations, failing to obtain required permits may breach both contractual and tort duties. The decision is a cautionary reminder that regulatory compliance defines both legal risk and commercial expectations in real estate transactions.

No Permit Big Problems

No Permit, Big Problems: Building Code Compliance,  Implied Terms and Vendor-Builder Liability in Ontario

Daniel (Dan) R. Chubb

Corporate Commercial Lawyer at Bennett Jones Edmonton

Joan Bilsland

Knowledge Management Research Lawyer at Bennett Jones

Knowledge Management Research Lawyer

Luke Stretch

Commercial Real Estate Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

Canadian courts generally treat real estate deposits as forfeitable upon a purchaser&rsquo;s default, distinct from unenforceable penalty clauses. However, under the Redstone factors, courts may grant relief from forfeiture where a deposit is grossly disproportionate to the vendor&rsquo;s damages or where retaining it would be unconscionable in the circumstances.

When A Deposit Becomes A Penalty

When a Deposit Becomes a Penalty: Relief From Forfeiture in Real Estate Transactions

Andrew N. Disipio

Mining & Corporate Finance Lawyer | M&A, Equity & Debt Deals

Hon. John R. Baird P.C.

Senior Advisor | International Trade, Investment & Security

Senior Business Advisor

Sander A.J.R. Grieve KC

Global Mining Finance & M&A Lawyer | Bennett Jones Toronto

Members of Bennett Jones' mining team shared their insights across three panels held at the firm's Toronto office during this year's PDAC convention. The discussions addressed the opportunities and complexities of this evolving landscape&mdash;and what Canada must do to capitalize on the moment.

The Changing Regulation of Canadian Oligopolies: Complementary Enforcement Roles for Section 90.1 and Joint Dominance

From the Same Authors

Martin v. Alphabet: Tribunal Sets the Public Interest Leave Framework—Evidence and Capacity Now the Gatekeepers

Final Guidelines from the Competition Bureau on Environmental Claims in Canada

Class Actions: Looking Forward 2025

Latest Insights

Proptech: Patents and Patent Litigation

Rights of First Refusal in Canadian Commercial Real Estate: Navigating Portfolio ROFRs

No Permit, Big Problems: Building Code Compliance, Implied Terms and Vendor-Builder Liability in Ontario

When a Deposit Becomes a Penalty: Relief From Forfeiture in Real Estate Transactions

Stay Informed. Stay Ahead.