Bennett Jones

Education

University of Toronto, BA (Hons., Criminology/Sociology), 2005 University of Windsor, LLB, 2009

Bar Admissions

Ontario, 2010

Amanda C. McLachlan

Partner

T: 416.777.5393 / E: mclachlana@bennettjones.com

Toronto

Amanda McLachlan provides decisive counsel to public companies, executives and boards navigating high-stakes disputes and investigations. In these critical moments, Amanda is the trusted ally clients turn to for risk mitigation, compliance strategies and effective resolutions.

A committed advocate and partner in business, Amanda has a proven track record representing clients—like public companies, manufacturers, investment banks and corporate leadership—in responding to regulatory scrutiny, internal investigations and high-stakes litigation. Across all matters, Amanda brings a strategic, results-driven approach to safeguarding her clients’ interests.

Commercial Litigation

With a practice focused on complex corporate and commercial disputes, Amanda has significant experience managing all aspects of litigation and dispute resolution—including shareholder disputes, enforcement actions, post-employment claims and fraud investigations. Amanda has appeared at all levels of court in Ontario and has represented clients before numerous administrative and regulatory bodies, such as the Ontario Labour Relations Board and the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal.

Securities Litigation & Regulatory Investigations

Amanda provides strategic counsel in high-stakes securities litigation and regulatory investigations representing issuers, directors, officers and financial institutions in complex disputes. She has extensive experience defending clients in regulatory investigations and resulting litigation, as well as shareholder disputes and securities class actions. With a deep understanding of evolving securities laws and enforcement trends, Amanda helps clients anticipate and mitigate risks before they escalate. She regularly advises on compliance matters, disclosure obligations and corporate governance failures, guiding companies, boards and special committees through high-profile investigations and enforcement proceedings.

Amanda also assists clients in navigating inquiries related to the Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act (CFPOA) and other financial misconduct matters—including insider trading allegations, misrepresentation claims and breaches of fiduciary duties. She conducts internal reviews, responds to regulatory subpoenas and manages parallel litigation to ensure a coordinated, business-aligned defense. Her ability to negotiate resolutions and mitigate reputational harm makes her a trusted advisor in cases involving cross-border regulatory scrutiny and enforcement actions.

Fraud & Financial Crimes

A leader in financial crime matters, Amanda has extensive experience pursuing fraud and asset recovery cases both domestically and across multiple jurisdictions. She routinely obtains Norwich Pharmacal orders, Anton Piller orders and worldwide freezing injunctions (Mareva orders) to trace, preserve and recover assets globally. Amanda works closely with international legal teams to execute cross-border enforcement strategies, ensuring seamless coordination in multi-jurisdictional disputes. She is also a trusted advisor on corporate fraud investigations, helping clients identify risks, strengthen governance and recover misappropriated assets.

Amanda has been named as a leading lawyer under 40 in Canada by both Lexpert and Benchmark. She has also ranked by Chambers Canada in the areas of Securities Litigation and White Collar Defence.

Beyond her practice, Amanda is committed to thought leadership and industry advocacy. She sits on the executive of the Ontario Chapter of the Women in White Collar Defence Association and is currently an adjunct professor for Osgoode University, where she co-teaches the Advanced Commercial Litigation Workshop. Dedicated to contributing to her community, Amanda is a board member for Story Planet—a not-for-profit organization that promotes storytelling and literacy among at-risk youth—and an active volunteer with Pro Bono Ontario.

Select Experience

Katanga Mining Limited, in the review by Katanga’s Independent Directors of certain of Katanga’s historical accounting practices, and in connection with the restatement of the Katanga’s previously filed financial statements arising from the review. Katanga is a publicly traded company whose majority shareholder is Glencore, one of the world’s largest mining companies
Katanga Mining Limited, in its settlement agreement with the Ontario Securities Commission following an investigation by staff of the Ontario Securities Commission into certain of Katanga’s historical public disclosures. Katanga is a publicly traded company whose majority shareholder is Glencore, one of the world’s largest mining companies.
Katanga Mining Limited, in the US$5.6 billion recapitalization plan initiated by its parent Glencore PLC, pursuant to which Katanga issued US$5.6 billion in equity to retire debt owed to its copper-cobalt joint venture partner, the Democratic Republic of Congo state-owned Gécamines, in order to resolve all disputes arising from an action brought by Gécamines in the DRC to dissolve joint venture operating company owned by Katanga (75%) and Gécamines (25%).
The Special Committee of Central GoldTrust, in Sprott Asset Management's $1-billion hostile takeover bid for all the outstanding Units of Central GoldTrust
The Special Committee of Silver Bullion Trust, in Sprott Asset Management's $62-million hostile takeover bid for all the outstanding Units of Silver Bullion Trust
Mariann Taylor-Baptiste, in an application for judicial review arising from a decision of the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario involving a conflict of rights between union speech and freedom from discrimination
Osisko Mining Corporation, in its response to Goldcorp Inc's unsolicited offer and subsequent agreement with Yamana Gold Inc. and Agnico Eagle Mines Limited to jointly acquire 100% of Osisko's issued and outstanding common shares for total consideration of $3.9 billion

Recent Recognitions

Chambers Canada

Ranked, Litigation: Securities – Ontario
Ranked, White-Collar Crime & Government Investigations
Benchmark Litigation: Canada

40 & Under Hot List
Recognized as a Litigation Star
Canadian Legal Lexpert Directory

Repeatedly Recommended, Litigation - Securities
Lexpert Rising Stars

2021 Rising Star Winner

Recent Insights, News & Events

Bennett Jones Lawyers Named Among Canada’s Top Litigators By Benchmark Canada
Announcements / May 01, 2025
Thirty-seven Bennett Jones lawyers have been recognized in the Benchmark Canada 2025 rankings, including 30 Litigation Stars and 10 Future Stars. Five of our lawyers were also named among the Top 50 Trial Lawyers in Canada.
Short-Selling Structure Not Abusive—Ontario Capital Markets Tribunal Dismisses OSC Allegations in High-Profile Enforcement Proceeding
Blog / December 04, 2024
In recent years, the OSC and other regulatory bodies began signaling to public markets that regulators intended to crack down on what they termed abusive short-sellers. Against this backdrop, the OSC brought enforcement proceedings before the Ontario Capital Markets Tribunal (CMT) naming Cormark Securities Inc., Saline Investments Ltd., and individuals as respondents. The proceedings focused on an alleged illegal and abusive short selling scheme. At the conclusion of a lengthy hearing on the merits, the CMT dismissed all of the OSC’s allegations.
Bennett Jones Top Ranked in Chambers Canada 2025
Announcements / September 26, 2024
Bennett Jones is proud to have once again been recognized as one of Canada’s leading law firms across 41 practice areas, with 135 lawyer rankings in Chambers Canada 2025. These rankings reflect the deep trust our clients place in us to solve their most complex legal matters and underscore our lawyers' extensive understanding of their industries and businesses, enabling us to consistently deliver an exceptional experience. In this year's guide, Bennett Jones has 10 Band 1 practice rankings, 20 Band 1 lawyer rankings and 10 newly-ranked lawyers. In addition to this year's rankings, Bennett Jones was awarded Class Action Law Firm of the Year and was a finalist for Real Estate Law Firm of the Year.
Four Bennett Jones Lawyers Honoured in Benchmark 40 & Under Hot List 2024
Announcements / August 08, 2024
Lamont Bartlett, Gannon Beaulne, Amanda McLachlan and Katherine Booth have been honoured in the 2024 Benchmark 40 & Under Hot List.
Bennett Jones Top Ranked in Chambers Canada 2024
Announcements / September 28, 2023
Bennett Jones has been recognized as one of Canada’s leading law firms across 39 practice areas, with 124 lawyer rankings in Chambers Canada 2024. In this year's guide, Bennett Jones has 11 Band 1 practice rankings, 21 Band 1 lawyer rankings and 10 newly-ranked lawyers. In addition to this year's rankings, Bennett Jones was awarded Real Estate Law Firm of the Year and was a finalist in Projects and Energy Law Firm of the Year.
Benchmark 40 & Under Hot List Honours Four Bennett Jones Lawyers
Announcements / August 01, 2023
Lamont Bartlett, Gannon Beaulne, Laura Gill and Amanda McLachlan have been honoured in the 2023 Benchmark 40 & Under Hot List.
Forty Bennett Jones Lawyers Recognized In Benchmark Canada 2023
Announcements / April 26, 2023
Bennett Jones is Highly Recommended in the 2023 Benchmark Canada rankings, with 40 individual lawyers ranked this year—30 Litigation Stars and 10 Future Stars. Benchmark Litigation's law firm and lawyer rankings based on extensive interviews with litigators, dispute resolution specialists and their clients as well as analysis of the market’s most important cases and firm developments.
Ontario Court of Appeal Case Upholds Closing Payment Direction Against Lender
Blog / March 06, 2023
Borrowers and lenders negotiating payment directions on the closing of loan transactions should take heed of the recent decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal in Kemeny v. Callidus Capital Corporation, 2023 ONCA 76.
A Canadian Perspective on Global Investigations Around the World
Articles / January 23, 2023
Sabrina Bandali, Emrys Davis, Alan Gardner, Laura Inglis, Amanda McLachlan, Ruth Promislow and Nathan Shaheen co-author the Canada chapter in Global Investigations Review's Practitioner’s Guide to Global Investigations, Volume II: Global Investigations around the World. They look at the nuances of law and process in Canada that practitioners are likely to encounter in cross-border investigations. This includes Canada's legal framework for corporate liability, the steps in an investigation, co-operative agreements giving immunity or leniency and corporate compliance programs.
Age 65 Cut-Off for Long-Term Disability Benefits Coverage Not a Charter Violation
Blog / September 19, 2022
In Rayonier v Unifor, Locals 256 and 89 arbitrator Paula Knopf dismissed a union policy grievance which alleged that an age 65 cut-off for long-term disability benefits coverage under the parties' collective bargaining agreement was in violation of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Benchmark 40 & Under Hot List Honours Three Bennett Jones Lawyers
Announcements / August 02, 2022
Laura Gill, Justin Lambert and Amanda McLachlan have been honoured once again in the 2022 Benchmark 40 & Under Hot List.
Bennett Jones Highly Recommended in Benchmark Canada 2022
Announcements / April 28, 2022
Bennett Jones is Highly Recommended as a firm in the 2022 Benchmark Canada rankings, with 38 individual lawyers ranked this year—30 are Litigation Stars, with 5 ranked as a Top 50 Trial Lawyer, and 8 are Future Stars.
Jim Patterson and Amanda McLachlan on Fraudulent Schemes During COVID-19
Articles / February 03, 2022
Jim Patterson and Amanda McLachlan write "COVID-19: detecting fraudulent schemes perpetrated by employees" in Financier Worldwide.
Amanda McLachlan and Sharon Singh Are 2021 Lexpert Rising Stars
Announcements / November 25, 2021
Amanda McLachlan and Sharon Singh are Lexpert Rising Star winners for 2021. This prestigious award honours Canada’s leading lawyers under 40 from law firms, in-house departments and other practices. This year's Rising Stars were announced during the virtual Young Lawyers Summit.
Benchmark 40 & Under Hot List Honours Three Bennett Jones Lawyers
Announcements / July 21, 2021
Three Bennett Jones lawyers are honoured in the 2021 Benchmark 40 & Under Hot List: Laura M. Gill, Justin R. Lambert, and Amanda C. McLachlan.
Bennett Jones Wins Class Action Team of the Year Award
Announcements / May 19, 2021
Bennett Jones is the winner in the Class Action Team of the Year category in the 2021 Canadian Law Awards, for the firm's work for the defendants in Winder v. Marriott International Inc. The Canadian Law Awards recognizes the nation’s leading law firms, in-house legal teams, individuals, deals and cases over the past year, reflecting true excellence in the country's legal profession.
Bennett Jones Highly Recommended in Benchmark Canada 2021
Announcements / May 04, 2021
Bennett Jones is Highly Recommended as a firm in the 2021 Benchmark Canada rankings, with 37 individual lawyers ranked this year—29 are Litigation Stars, 8 are Future Stars and 5 are Top 50 Trial Lawyers.
Three Bennett Jones Lawyers in Benchmark 40 & Under Hot List
Announcements / August 05, 2020
Three Bennett Jones lawyers have been honoured in the 2020 Benchmark 40 & Under Hot List.
Lessons in Digital Asset Recovery
Blog / June 02, 2020
The frequency of ransomware attacks has increased in 2020, including in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. Further, ransomware attacks have become more sophisticated as their perpetrators seek to leverage new and emerging technologies. Such efforts include the selection of novel forms of ransom, with digital assets and cryptocurrencies becoming the new ransom of choice for many hackers and extortionists.
Ontario Court of Appeal Adopts a Broad Definition of What Constitutes a “Security”
Blog / April 14, 2020
In Ontario Securities Commission v. Tiffin, 2020 ONCA 217, the Court of Appeal for Ontario has adopted a broad approach to what constitutes a "security" within the meaning of the Securities Act, R.S.O. [...]
The Canada Emergency Response Benefit for Individuals Impacted by COVID-19—New Details Announced
Blog / April 02, 2020
On April 1, 2020, the Canadian government announced further details of the previously announced Canada Emergency Response Benefit (CERB), including updated information about how applicants can apply for benefits.
An Overview of the Canada Emergency Response Benefit in Respect of COVID-19 Employment Disruptions
Blog / March 26, 2020
On March 25, 2020, the Canadian government announced the creation of a temporary program called the Canada Emergency Response Benefit (CERB) to address the overwhelming number of Employment Insurance (EI) applications following upon the COVID-19 pandemic. The CERB is intended to be a simple and efficient mechanism to get benefits to individuals impacted by business and employment disruptions caused by the COVID-19 situation. The CERB will be available to both individuals who would normally be eligible for EI benefits, and to those who would not traditionally qualify, such as self-employed workers.
Employer's Guide to COVID-19—Managing Issues of Pay
Blog / March 19, 2020
Businesses across Canada have been hard hit by the COVID-19 pandemic. With the Dow Jones having had its biggest point drop in history on March 16, and the TSX down by almost 10 percent, many businesses across industries have been left reeling from investor uncertainty arising from the current state of the economy, reduced customer demand (and therefore revenue), and increasing pressure to reduce operations to support efforts to increase social distancing among customers and employees alike.
Court of Appeal Decision Welcome News for Victims of Fraud
Updates / April 10, 2019
The Ontario Court of Appeal’s decision in Wescom Solutions Inc v Minet, 2019 ONCA 251 released on April 1, 2019, provides helpful guidance for victims of fraud seeking to pursue civil recovery against third parties.
Bennett Jones Names Four New Partners
Announcements / March 11, 2019
Bennett Jones is pleased to announce that four lawyers have been admitted to the partnership. They come from a cross-section of practice and industry specialty areas, including labour and employment , health law, wills, estates and trusts, corporate and commercial disputes, employment litigation, class actions, domestic and international commercial arbitration, and investor state arbitration.
Amanda McLachlan in The Lawyer's Daily on Pro Bono Ontario
In The News / November 23, 2018
Amanda McLachlan comments in The Lawyer's Daily on the outpouring of support from the legal profession to help keep Pro Bono Ontario's (PBO) Law Help Centres open. Bennett Jones donated $8,500. Amanda says that, "My colleague Grace McKeown and I were recently successful in defending a small claims court matter on a pro bono basis. The decision included a costs award. When we learned that PBO was being forced to close it's Law Help Centres, we proposed a donation of the $8,500 in costs to PBO. Bennett Jones immediately agreed." Amanda added that the donation seemed fitting since the costs award was received from representing litigants who would have otherwise been self-represented.
Amanda McLachlan Featured in PrecedentJD
In The News / September 05, 2018
Amanda McLachlan is featured in a Q&A in PrecedentJD Magazine on her corporate litigation practice. She talks about her approach to working on new cases, advising clients in high-stakes matters and providing strategy in the fast-paced business and finance sectors. She also offers advice to students interested in a career in litigation. Amanda’s interview is on page 16 of the Fall 2018 issue.
Successful Judgement in Pro Bono #metoo Case
Announcements / August 01, 2018
On August 1, 2018, the Honourable Deputy Judge Mauth released a favourable decision in a small claims case on which Bennett Jones associates Grace McKeown and Amanda McLachlan were representing the defendants on a pro bono basis. The case stems from alleged incidents of bullying, sexual harassment and discrimination against the defendants that look place when the plaintiff and the defendants were employed at the same workplace for two and a half years. In 2015, the defendants launched an application to the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal, naming the plaintiff and the defendants' former employer, alleging that they had experienced harassment and discrimination in the workplace. Following settlement discussions between the defendants and their former employer, the defendants withdrew their applications to the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal. In March of 2016, the plaintiff served a statement of claim for damages that arose from alleged defamation, harassment, abuse of process and intentional interference with contractual relations. The allegations were based on the same factual basis forming the original applications made to the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal. The trial was heard over two days in November 2017 and February 2018. On August 1, 2018, Deputy Judge Mauth dismissed all of the plaintiff’s claims against the defendants, finding that the plaintiff failed to prove both liability and damages. As part of our commitment to bettering the communities in which we live, Bennett Jones lawyers devote innumerable hours to providing pro bono legal services in a diverse range of areas from financial and business to civil liberties and human rights. This important work serves many purposes—it helps fulfill our shared belief as a firm that all Canadians are entitled to access to justice, it helps provide genuine professional development opportunities to our students and associates, and it encourages our lawyers to pursue areas of interest.
On Strict Terms: Wording of Termination Provision Not What the Employer Does Determines Enforceability
Blog / February 28, 2017
Highlighting the importance of using precise language in termination provisions of employment contracts, the Ontario Court of Appeal in Wood v Fred Deeley Imports Ltd., 2017 ONCA 158 [Wood] recently held [...]
Best practices for dealing with whistleblowers
Articles / January 01, 2017
A s corporate criminals become increasingly sophisticated, employers, regulators and other investigative bodies are becoming more reliant on whistleblowers to expose fraud, waste and other forms of wrongdoing. Whether through internal or external employer-sponsored programs or newly emerging regulatory regimes, whistleblowers may report misconduct in a myriad of ways. Published in Legal Alert, Vol. 35, No. 10.
Bennett Jones Academy Series: Employment Services Update: What's New and What Employers Need to Know
Bennett Jones Academy Events / November 15, 2016
As an employer, you need to be informed of the latest developments in employment law. Please join the Bennett Jones Employment Services Group for a discussion of current issues for employers and how best to adapt to changes in law to reduce employer costs and litigation exposure.
Are you protected from social engineering fraud?
Articles / July 01, 2016
Technology creates new opportunities for corporate crime and in particular, for computer savvy criminals. As cybercrime increases in sophistication and quantity, businesses are faced with a heightened risk of falling victim to losses sustained through digital schemes. Published in Legal Alert, Vol. 35, No. 4.
Ontario Court Upholds Limitations on Liability for Misrepresentations Contained in Take-Over Bid Circulars
Blog / August 10, 2015
In a decision released on July 30, 2015, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice has clarified that plaintiffs seeking to advance claims under section 131(1) of the Securities Act (Ontario) alleging misrepresentation [...]
Substantive Series: Times Are Changing - New Developments in Accommodating Family Status Discrimination
Bennett Jones Academy Events / June 16, 2015
Please join Bennett Jones for a session where we will examine recent developments in family status accommodation, including recent decisions from the Federal Court of Appeal, Ontario and the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario.
Court of Appeal Denies Certification in Another Misclassification Overtime Class Action
Blog / October 08, 2014
In the latest instalment in a series of recent employment class actions, the Court of Appeal for Ontario has dismissed an appeal by class action plaintiffs in Brown v Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce. [...]
2014 Annual Update on Human Rights: Keeping on Top of Key Developments
Speaking Engagements / May 23, 2014
Ranjan Agarwal co-chairs the Ontario Bar Association's Annual Update on Human Rights: Keeping on Top of Key Developments. Amanda McLachlan presents "Essential Procedural Updates in Human Rights Litigation".
The Rise of Employment Class Actions?
Blog / February 07, 2014
As we discussed in an earlier blog post, a class action alleging BMO Nesbitt Burns failed to pay overtime to its current and former investment advisors was certified in August 2013. Rosen is the first [...]
New Mass Termination Claim Certified in Ontario
Blog / January 23, 2014
On January 2, 2014, Justice Perell certified a class action alleging that, among other things, a group of over 500 putative class members had been wrongfully dismissed by their former (now insolvent ) [...]
Justice Belobaba Certifies Ontario's First “Misclassification” Overtime Class Action
Articles / September 16, 2013
In a decision that marks the first of its kind, on August 20, 2013, Justice Belobaba of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice certified a class action alleging that BMO Nesbitt Burns Inc. failed to pay overtime to a group of 1,500 current and former Investment Advisors. The decision in Rosen v BMO Nesbitt Burns Inc. follows on the heels of a tumultuous period in which the Supreme Court of Canada denied leave to appeal certification in two “off-the-clock” overtime cases and the Superior Court of Justice, Divisional Court and the Court of Appeal of Ontario declined to certify two “misclassification” cases, including a case premised on a group of similarly situated employees in Brown v Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce. Published in Labour Notes (Number 1482).
Sino-Forest: Resolving Intercreditor Disputes in the CCAA
Articles / August 23, 2013
Almost ten years ago, Justice Farley commented in Stelco Inc. (Re.) that the Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act [CCAA] was styled as an “Act to facilitate compromises and arrangements between companies and their creditors,” and there was “no mention of this extending by statute to encompass a change of relationship among the creditors vis-à-vis the creditors themselves and not directly involving the company.” And for the most part, this conclusion of law is unassailable: the CCAA is designed not to be the panacea for all grievances but rather to facilitate a compromise of claims against an insolvent company. It would be unduly problematic to hold up a compromise of claims between a debtor and its creditors for a resolution of all disputes that might exist among creditors—the disputes that are unrelated to or do not affect the distribution from the debtor. Published in the August 2013 edition (Volume 25, Nos. 5 & 6) of Commercial Insolvency Reporter.
Ontario Court Certifies Investment Advisors Overtime Class Action
Blog / August 22, 2013
In a decision that marks the first of its kind, on August 20, 2013, Justice Belobaba of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice certified a class action alleging that BMO Nesbitt Burns Inc. failed to pay [...]
Justice Belobaba Certifies Ontario's First “Misclassification” Overtime Class Action
Updates / August 22, 2013
In a decision that marks the first of its kind, on August 20, 2013, Justice Belobaba of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice certified a class action alleging that BMO Nesbitt Burns Inc. (“BMO”) failed to pay overtime to a group of 1,500 current and former Investment Advisors. The decision in Rosen v BMO Nesbitt Burns Inc. follows on the heels of a tumultuous period in which the Supreme Court of Canada denied leave to appeal certification in two “off-the-clock” overtime cases and the Superior Court of Justice, Divisional Court and the Court of Appeal of Ontario declined to certify two “misclassification” cases, including a case premised on a group of similarly situated employees in Brown v Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce.
Ontario Court of Appeal Weighs in on Claim Advanced by Problem Gamblers
Blog / August 15, 2013
On July 31, 2013, problem gamblers in Ontario were denied certification of a proposed class action commenced against the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation. Writing for a unanimous panel in Dennis [...]
Ontario Court of Appeal Upholds Denial of Certification for Problem Gamblers
Updates / August 15, 2013
In a ruling released on July 31, 2013, problem gamblers in Ontario were denied certification of a $3.5-billion class action law suit commenced against the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation. The Court of Appeal's decision in Dennis v Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation marks the third in a string of decisions declining to certify the proposed action on the basis of its failure to overcome the hurdles of section 5(1)(b)-(e) of the Class Proceedings Act.
The Duty to Accommodate Family Status (and Potentially Lifestyle Choices Too)
Blog / February 25, 2013
In an update last October (Accommodating Family Status “ Needs vs. Preferences) we advised you that the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal established a new test for an employer's duty to accommodate on the [...]
The Duty to Accommodate Family Status (and Potentially Lifestyle Choices Too)
Updates / February 25, 2013
In an update last October (Accommodating Family Status – Needs vs. Preferences) we advised you that the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal established a new test for an employer's duty to accommodate on the basis of family status (i.e., must accommodate an employee's genuine needs but not mere preferences). All employers, but especially federally regulated employers should take note that the Federal Court recently outlined an even more liberal and broad interpretation of the duty to accommodate on the basis of family status. The Federal Court confirmed in the decision of Attorney General of Canada v. Fiona Anna Johnstone and Canadian Human Rights Commission, 2013 FC 113, that parental childcare obligations fall within the scope of family status. In doing so, the court confirmed the central question as “whether or not the employment rule in question interfered with an employee's ability to fulfill substantial parental obligations in a realistic way”. Significantly, the court rejected the line of cases (Health Sciences Assoc. of B.C. v. Campbell River and North Island Transition Society) that held there must be a “serious interference” with a substantial family duty (including parental or elder care) for the employee to prove discrimination on basis of family status. As such, this decision opens the door to requiring accommodation of employee lifestyle choices. As a result of the Johnstone decision, employers should understand that while there is still some conflicting law on the applicable standard for accommodating family status, the law is clear that requests for accommodation on the basis of family status must be treated seriously. Published on the Bennett Jones Thought Network.
Constitutional, Civil Liberties and Human Rights Law
Speaking Engagements / February 07, 2013
Ranjan Agarwal is program chair for the Ontario Bar Association's Constitutional, Civil Liberties and Human Rights Law - Back to Basics: Litigating Human Rights Applications program at the Westin Harbour Castle Conference Centre in Toronto. In addition, Amanda McLachlan participates in a panel discussion on ethical issues in mediation.
Accommodating Family Status – Needs vs. Preferences
Updates / October 30, 2012
A recent decision of the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal, Devaney v. ZRV Holdings Limited 2012 HRTO 1590, suggests if the employee's caregiving responsibilities are required, as opposed to a mere preference, the employer will have a duty to accommodate.
Ontario Superior Court Refuses to Certify Proposed Misclassification Overtime Action
Articles / May 29, 2012
Justice George Strathy of the Ontario Superior Court has refused to certify a proposed class action commenced against the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce and CIBC World Markets on behalf of a class of employees alleging that their jobs were Information and misclassified in a way that wrongfully defeated their entitlement to be paid overtime. Co-authored by Amanda C. McLachlan and published in CCH Canadian Limited's Labour Notes newsletter, Number 1451.
Ontario Superior Court Refuses to Certify Proposed Misclassification Overtime Class Action
Updates / May 07, 2012
Justice George Strathy of the Ontario Superior Court has refused to certify a proposed class action commenced against the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce and CIBC World Markets on behalf of a class of employees alleging that their jobs were misclassified in a way that wrongfully defeated their entitlement to be paid overtime.
Supreme Court Weighs in on Interplay Between Class Actions and Arbitration Clauses in Consumer Contracts
Updates / April 25, 2011
Arbitration clauses have been used in Canada, with mixed results, as a mechanism by which potential defendants have attempted to lessen their exposure to class actions. Arbitration clauses are frequently contained in consumer contracts and, in particular, in service contracts. These clauses typically require consumers to participate in mediation or arbitration and, often, to waive all rights to participate in class action proceedings.
Dollars and Scents: Do Employers Have an Obligation to Provide a Scent-Free Workplace?
Articles / May 26, 2010
In a recent U.S. decision, the City of Detroit paid a significant damages award to a former employee with a chemical sensitivity. Given some of the recent trends in the jurisprudence, it is possible that a similar decision, or a law that specifically prohibits workplace scents, is not far off in Canada. Employers can be proactive by implementing a workplace scent policy, and employing some routine avoidance measures.
Revisiting Family Status in Employment
Articles / April 14, 2010
Ranjan Agarwal and Amanda McLachlan look at a development in the threshold for determining whether an employer must accommodate the needs of families in the employment context. "Revisiting 'Family Status' in Employment" (2009) Charter and Human Rights Litigation 16:3 at 1314.