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

Simon Foxcroft

Commercial Contracts Lawyer | Mining, Energy & Construction

Partner

Mathieu J. LaFleche

Regulatory Litigation Lawyer | Employment & Privacy

Jennifer A. Miller KC

Occupational Health & Safety (OHS) and Employment Lawyer

Bill 47: Ensuring Safety and Cutting Red Tape Act, 2020, was introduced in the Alberta Legislature on November 5, 2020, and, if passed, will come into force on September 1, 2021. Among other things, Bill 47 comprehensively overhauls occupational health and safety legislation by replacing the current Occupational Health and Safety Act with a new act.

Proposed Sweeping Changes to Albertas Occupational Health and Safety Act

Proposed Sweeping Changes to Alberta's Occupational Health and Safety Act

"When fishermen cannot go to sea, they mend their nets." The pandemic has created very challenging economic conditions while the health hazard of the virus has itself brought occupational health and safety (OHS) issues to the forefront. Complying with OHS laws is difficult at the best of times, but how do you cope when your budgets are slashed, your workforce is diminished, your work sites are at risk of viral contamination and workers may be working remotely?

Maximizing Your Safety Compliance and Efficiency During a Trying  Economic Environment

Practical suggestions and tips on economical ways to strengthen your safety program during the pandemic.

Maximizing Your Safety Compliance and Efficiency In a Trying Economic Environment

Sara G. Parchello

Employment Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

John Gilmore is the author of the book: <a href="https://store.thomsonreuters.ca/product-detail/cannabis-in-the-workplace/" target="_blank">Cannabis in the Workplace</a>.  Legalization of cannabis will have a large impact on workplaces in ways that alcohol has not. Employers face various cannabis-related issues with respect to health and safety, privacy, accommodation, and even criminal matters. This book will provide needed guidance and straightforward analysis, and it will identify areas of possible concern for employers. -	Matthew MacDonald,
Tyler Henderson,
Sara Parchello,
Talia Bregman,
Stephen Burns,
Jennifer Miller,
Mathieu LaFleche, John Batzel,
Dana Kiefer, Susan G. Seller,
and Lauren Millar are
listed as co-authors.  Published by Carswell.

Cannabis in the Workplace

Lincoln Caylor

Commercial Litigation and Fraud Lawyer

Partner 

Jim Schmidt

Commercial Litigation and Fraud Lawyer in Bennett Jones Edmonton

Lincoln Caylor and Jim Schmidt provide comments on&nbsp;H.M.B. Holdings Limited v. Replay Resorts Inc. in the British Columbia edition of&nbsp;Take Five, a newsletter of OnPoint Legal Research.
Lincoln and Jim were counsel for the appellants.

BC Take Five July 2018

Lincoln Caylor and Jim Schmidt on H.M.B. Holdings Limited v. Replay Resorts Inc.

Ruth E. Promislow

Privacy, Cybersecurity & AI Lawyer

Caroline Poirier

IT, Privacy & Data Protection Lawyer

Suzie Suliman

Commercial Transactions Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Associate, Trademark Agent

The 2025 GPEN Sweep highlights growing global scrutiny of how digital platforms handle children&rsquo;s personal information, revealing increased data collection alongside limited safeguards. While improvements have been made in areas such as account deletion, significant gaps remain in effective age assurance, transparency, and protective design. The findings signal that regulators are likely to intensify guidance and enforcement efforts to better protect children&rsquo;s privacy online.

Global Privacy Sweep Highlights Growing Expectations for Childrens Privacy Online

Global Privacy Sweep Highlights Growing Expectations for Children's Privacy Online

Nina Butz

Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Jackson Spencer

Commercial Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Vancouver

Associate

This article highlights recent decisions demonstrating courts&rsquo; strict approach to certifying privacy class actions in Canada. It shows how failures to establish an identifiable class, viable claims, or compensable harm can be fatal at certification. The rulings reaffirm courts&rsquo; gatekeeping role and signal continued challenges for plaintiffs advancing privacy-based claims.

Courts show Continued Commitment to Closely Scrutinizing Proposed Privacy Class Actions

Recent Decisions Reinforce Certification Challenges

Courts Continue Close Scrutiny of Privacy Class Actions

Emrys Davis

Competition & Antitrust Litigation Lawyer

Ana Nizharadze

Commercial Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

This article examines the growing wave of drip pricing class actions following recent amendments to the Competition Act. It analyzes key Federal Court decisions that clarify how courts assess &ldquo;unattainable prices,&rdquo; fixed and obligatory fees, and damages at the certification stage. With several appeals and new cases underway, these rulings offer early guidance on how disclosure obligations may evolve in 2026 and beyond.

From First Price to Final Cost Drip Pricing Cases on the Rise

"Drip Pricing" Cases on the Rise

From First Price to Final Cost

Lukas VanDusen

Competition & Antitrust Lawyer | Foreign Investment

This article reviews the Competition Tribunal&rsquo;s first decision interpreting the new public interest standing provisions under the Competition Act. It establishes a three-part test for leave and emphasizes the need for a strong evidentiary record, including a viable litigation plan and demonstrated capacity to pursue complex claims. The decision underscores the Tribunal&rsquo;s gatekeeping role while providing guidance for future applicants and respondents.

Quasi Class Actions at the Competition Tribunal

Tribunal Provides First Guidance on Requirements for Public Interest Standing  

Quasi-Class Actions at the Competition Tribunal

Gannon Beaulne

Thomas Feore

This article explores how courts continue to apply and refine the &ldquo;some basis in fact&rdquo; test for certifying common issues in class actions. Recent decisions illustrate that while expert evidence is not always required, plaintiffs must provide sufficient admissible evidence to support both the existence of common issues and their class-wide resolution. The rulings reinforce certification as a meaningful screening tool and provide guidance on evidentiary expectations going forward.

Bennett Jones Fraud Seminar

From the Same Authors