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

Michael A. Eizenga L.S.M.

Leading Canadian Class Action Litigator at Bennett Jones Toronto

Partner 

Pascale Dionne-Bourassa

Civil and Commercial Litigator, Construction Law Lawyer at Bennett Jones (Québec) LLP

Montréal Managing Partner

Katherine Booth

Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Vancouver

Partner

Bennett Jones partners <a href="/People/E/Eizenga-Michael">Michael Eizenga</a>, <a href="/People/D/Dionne-Bourassa-Pascale">Pascale Dionne-Bourassa</a>&nbsp;and <a href="/People/B/Booth-Katherine">Katherine Booth</a>&nbsp;have co-authored The Canadian Class Actions Handbook, published by LexisNexis. Building on The Class Actions Handbook released in 2022, this new edition brings together the core principles of class proceedings law and provides essential coverage of recent developments across Ontario, Quebec, British Columbia and the Federal Court.

The Canadian Class Actions Handbook

Emrys Davis

Commercial Litigation, Competition and Class Action Lawyer 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

Michael Eizenga speaks to Law.com about the resolution of a decades-long Canadian class action dispute, culminating in a C$32.5 billion agreement with the tobacco industry.

Tobacco Industry Settles for C325 Billion in Landmark Canadian Class Action

Tobacco Industry Settles for C$32.5 Billion in Landmark Canadian Class Action

Cheryl M. Woodin

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

In our 2024 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 2024

Class Actions: Looking Forward 2024

Edwin G. Kroft KC

Tax Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones

Andrew Young

Tax Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Associate

Antoine Messervier

Tax Lawyer at Bennett Jones Vancouver

This January 2026 edition of Bennett Jones on Tax Disputes highlights recent Canadian tax litigation, including key decisions on directors&rsquo; liability limitation periods, arrears interest on reassessments, and compliance orders. The featured cases emphasize the courts&rsquo; focus on statutory interpretation, procedural fairness, and taxpayer diligence, while offering practical guidance for managing dispute risk and financial exposure.

Bennett Jones on Tax Disputes Issue 40 January 2026

Bennett Jones on Tax Disputes: January 2026

Ahmed Elmallah

Intellectual Property Lawyer at Bennett Jones Edmonton

Counsel, Patent Agent, Trademark Agent

Edward (Ted) Yoo

Intellectual Property Lawyer and Canada/US Patent and Trademark Agent at Bennett Jones Edmonton

Partner, Patent Agent, Trademark Agent

Lorelei Graham

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

How an AI system is commercialized and deployed also affects whether patent protection is appropriate. In many cases, the degree of control retained by the provider over the deployed system acts as a counterweight to other considerations that might otherwise favor trade secret protection.

AI Patents A Corporate Decision Tool IV

The Business Delivery Model

AI: Is Patenting Really the Right Move? - Factor IV

This article forms one part of a broader decision framework for evaluating whether patent or trade secret protection is appropriate for AI innovation.&nbsp;The framework is designed to help decision-makers (e.g., innovaters, in house, CTOs) align patent and IP strategy with underlying business realities and moving beyond purely "legal" considerations.&nbsp;
Within that framework, this article addresses a second decision factor: what is the realistic patent scope for the AI innovation?&nbsp;An AI patent with meaningful scope can block competitors from implementing commercially viable alternatives. Assessing enforceable scope therefore requires focusing on some of the following factors: (a) competitor blocking potential; (b) detectability of infringement; and (c) divided infringement.

AI Patents A Corporate Decision Tool II

The Enforceable Patent Scope

AI: Is Patenting Really the Right Move? - Factor II

Defensive blocking considers whether a patent can prevent others from patenting or controlling adjacent technical or commercial space. It matters for two main reasons: (i) to stop competitors from obtaining patents that could later restrict your ability to operate, and (ii) to provide leverage for counter-assertion if a competitor brings a patent claim against you.

AI Patents A Corporate Decision Tool VI

Competitor Defensive Positioning

AI: Is Patenting Really the Right Move? - Factor VI

Finally, and most importantly, patentable potential addresses whether the innovation is likely to satisfy the main requirements for patentability: novelty, non-obviousness and subject-matter requirements. This assessment is highly fact-specific and depends on the prior art landscape and how the invention is framed. Early analysis helps determine whether patent protection is realistic and worth pursuing.

Class Actions Defence Invitational

From the Same Authors