People

Services

Industries

Firm

About

Knowledge

Careers

News

Events

Contact

Connect

Privacy Policy

Disclaimer

Terms of Use

Accessibility

Legal

Calgary

Edmonton

Montréal

Ottawa

Toronto

Vancouver

New York

Stephen D. Burns

Technology Lawyer, Intellectual Property Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

Partner, Trademark Agent

Matthew Flynn

Technology Transaction Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Partner

J. Sébastien A. Gittens

Intellectual Property and Technology Commercialization Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

AI transcription tools offer efficiency and accuracy in the boardroom but create risks to confidentiality, privacy and legal privilege. Organizations should adopt clear policies, safeguards and training to ensure responsible use and compliance with governance standards.

AI Notetaking in the Boardroom

Lorelei Graham

Food and Agribusiness Lawyer, IP Lawyer, Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

The United States Patent and Trademark Office's decision to cancel its Climate Change Mitigation pilot program for patents has not gone unnoticed in Canada. For Canadian policymakers and agri-tech innovators, this move by the United States raises two big questions: (1) How might this affect Canada&rsquo;s own intellectual property&nbsp; strategy for green tech, and (2) could it create opportunities for Canada (and others) to take the lead in certain climate-tech domains?
A particular area of interest is carbon-capture agri-tech, technologies that help farming not just reduce emissions but actively capture carbon (for instance, special crops or soil treatments that lock away carbon dioxide or farm machinery that traps greenhouse gases). These innovations are crucial for meeting climate goals and could become a competitive arena internationally.

Fast Tracks and Green Gaps Part IV

Fast Tracks and Green Gaps Part IV: Shifting Gears: How the United States' Exit from Climate Protection Fuels Canada's IP Advantage

Across the Atlantic, the European Union (EU) and its member states have also been encouraging climate-resilient agri-tech innovation, but their approach to intellectual property incentives has been a bit different. The European Union has set ambitious climate goals (like achieving climate neutrality by 2050) and launched the European Green Deal, a broad policy agenda to support sustainable technologies. While funding and regulations (such as support for sustainable farming practices) are big parts of the EU strategy, there is also recognition that IP rights play an important role in fostering innovation. However, unlike Canada or the recent US pilot program, Europe has not implemented a unified “green channel” for patent examination at the European Patent Office.

Fast Tracks and Green Gaps Part III

Fast Tracks and Green Gaps Part III: Green Without the Label: Europe's Pragmatic IP Approach to Agri-Tech Innovation

Steven L. Major KC

Commercial Dispute, Construction, Fraud, Police and Personal Injury Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

Drew C. Broughton

Corporate Commercial and M&A Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

Kevin Myson

Corporate, Commercial Transaction, Energy, Natural Resource and M&A Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

Canada is navigating a "wild frontier" in the energy industry, with a unique opportunity to forge successful and sustainable partnerships both domestically and internationally. This was the rallying call at the Energy Business Forum during the 74th Canadian Energy Executive Association (CEEA) conference in Banff, Alberta, where industry leaders gathered to share visions for the future of Canada's energy landscape.

Key Takeaways From the Wild Frontier Energy Business Forum CEEA 74

Key Takeaways From the "Wild Frontier" Energy Business Forum at CEEA '74

Melanie Teetaert

Commercial Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Vancouver

Jennifer (Jenn) K. Choi

Associate

Maruska Giacchetto

This article examines the Ontario Court of Appeal's decision in J.P. Thomson Architects Ltd. v Greater Essex County District School Board, 2025 ONCA 378, which provides critical clarification on the interpretation of multi-step dispute resolution (MSDR) clauses. MSDR clauses, commonly used in commercial contracts, outline escalating steps such as negotiation, mediation, and arbitration to resolve disputes. The Court addressed ambiguities in the drafting of MSDR timelines, emphasizing that specified timeframes should be interpreted as minimum waiting periods rather than strict deadlines. The decision overturned a lower court ruling that barred a party from arbitration due to a perceived failure to meet a 30-day mediation request deadline. This article highlights the importance of precise drafting in MSDR clauses, discusses the implications of the Court's decision, and provides practical guidance for parties drafting or negotiating dispute resolution provisions in commercial agreements.

Do you need to rush to mediate - Ontario Court of Appeal

Do You Need to Rush to Mediate? Ontario Court of Appeal Clarifies Interpretation of Multi-Step Dispute Resolution Clause


Bennett Jones Article Who needs the Derivative Action when you have the Oppression Remedy? May 15, 2008 Jeffrey S. Leon, "Who needs the Derivative Action when you have the Oppression Remedy?", Commercial Litigation Review, Vol. 6, No. 2 (May 2008). Share by Email Social Media Download Download Subscribe Republishing Requests For permission to republish this or any other publication, contact Amrita Kochhar at kochhara@bennettjones.com. For informational purposes only This publication provides an overview of legal trends and updates for informational purposes only. For personalized legal advice, please contact the authors.

Who needs the Derivative Action when you have the Oppression Remedy?