People

Services

Industries

Firm

About

Knowledge

Careers

News

Events

Contact

Connect

Privacy Policy

Disclaimer

Terms of Use

Accessibility

Legal

Calgary

Toronto

Edmonton

Ottawa

Vancouver

New York

Montréal

Ethan Z. Schiff

Commercial Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Partner

Gina Azer

Associate

In Morrison v. Hatts Off Inc. et al., <a href="https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/2025/2025onsc4320/2025onsc4320.html?resultId=8760cfe00fe74ba295dbd14a85eefd84&searchId=2025-08-07T10:20:54:326/6e00332474ec4055bfefdf0fc1a88e76&searchUrlHash=AAAAAQBTImNsYXNzIHByb2NlZWRpbmdzIiBPUiAiY2xhc3MgYWN0aW9uIiBPUiAiYWN0aW9uIGNvbGxlY3RpdmUiIE9SICJyZWNvdXJzIGNvbGxlY3RpZiIAAAAAAQ">2025 ONSC 4320</a>, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice declined to order pre-certification discovery of sensitive Children’s Aid Society records in a proposed class action alleging systemic negligence and fiduciary breaches in children’s group homes

Ontario Superior Court Rejects Pre Certification Discovery

Ontario Superior Court Rejects Pre-Certification Discovery in Children's Homes Class Action

Mehak Kawatra

In Voltage Pictures v Robert Salna, <a href="https://canlii.ca/t/kd8qd">2025 FCA 131</a>, the Federal Court of Appeal addressed the preferable procedure criterion in the context of a defendants’ class proceeding. The plaintiffs sought to certify an action against a class of defendants and, despite objection, impose the burden on Mr. Salna to represent the interests of the defendant group (the representative defendant).

Federal Court of Appeal Dismisses

Federal Court of Appeal Dismisses Class Action Certification Due To Unavoidable Individualized Inquiries

Maisah Syed

The Ontario Court of Appeal has concluded that a client's influence over a service provider's processes does not establish an employment relationship between the client and the service provider's employees. The plaintiffs in Davis v. Amazon Canada Fulfillment Services, 2025 ONCA 421

No Common Employer Means No Class Action Ontario Court of Appeal

No Common Employer Means No Class Action—Ontario Court of Appeal

In Tokio Marine & Nichido Fire Insurance v Honda Canada, <a rel="noopener noreferrer" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/2025/2025onsc2856/2025onsc2856.html" target="_blank">2025 ONSC 2856</a>, the Ontario Superior Court upheld an arbitral panel's conclusion that an umbrella insurance policy covered settled class counsel fees, but not settlement administration costs related to an enhanced recall. The underlying class action alleged airbag defects and the settlement provided certain benefits to reimburse class members. The decision reminds defendants that insurance may not cover a recall program within a settlement if the recall program does not respond to a risk that could actually result from litigation of a consumer claim.

What Class Action Settlement Costs Will A Defendants Insurer Cover

What Class Action Settlement Costs Will A Defendant's Insurer Cover? The Ontario Superior Court of Justice Provides Some Answers

Benjamin K. Reingold

Intellectual Property Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

Makda Yohannes

Stephen D. Burns

Technology Lawyer, Intellectual Property Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

Partner, Trademark Agent

As artificial intelligence becomes increasingly integrated into creative workflows, the use of typefaces and fonts raises complex intellectual property challenges. This article examines the distinction between typefaces and fonts, the scope of copyright, trademark and industrial design protection in Canada, and how AI tools may heighten infringement risks. It also outlines practical steps for designers and businesses to ensure compliance through proper licensing and responsible AI use.

Understanding IP Infringement Risk in Typeface Use in AI Generated Content

Understanding IP Infringement Risk in Typeface Use in AI-Generated Content

Lisa Kakoske

Corporate and Securities Lawyer

Samantha Chenatte

Associate at Bennett Jones Vancouver

Globally, women represent nearly half of the agricultural workforce, yet they still face systemic barriers that prevent them from accessing, using and contributing to innovations in agricultural technology (Agritech), which is poised to transform agricultural systems across the world.

Gender Inclusivity Driving Growth in Agritech Industry

Sara G. Parchello

Employment Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

David Cassin

Brendan J. Weiler

Employment Services Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Two recent Ontario Superior Court decisions&mdash;Li v Wayfair Canada Inc. and Jones v Strides Toronto&mdash;clarify that the phrase &ldquo;at any time&rdquo; in a termination clause does not automatically invalidate an employment agreement under the ESA. While both cases distinguish earlier restrictive rulings, ongoing inconsistencies, including the Chan decision, highlight the need for appellate guidance. Employers should continue to review contracts carefully to ensure ESA compliance.

Termination At Any Time A Review of Recent Developments

Termination “At Any Time”? A Review of Recent Developments from Li v Wayfair Canada Inc. and Jones v Strides Toronto

Mykala Way

Commercial Real Estate Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Jane C. Helmstadter

Real Estate Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

The Ontario Court of Appeal&rsquo;s decision in 100 Bloor Street West Corporation v. Barry&rsquo;s Bootcamp Canada Inc. underscores the risks of vague realty tax provisions in commercial leases. The case highlights how inconsistent or ambiguous calculation methods can expose both landlords and tenants to costly litigation. Clear, consistent, and fair drafting of tax allocation clauses is essential to avoid disputes and ensure predictable outcomes.

One Method Many Taxes Lease Interpretation and Realty Tax

One Method, Many Taxes: Lease Interpretation and Realty Tax Allocation in 100 Bloor Street West v. Barry’s Bootcamp

Michelle F. Yung

Real Estate Lawyer at Bennett Jones Vancouver

Vanessa Kiraly

A recent Ontario Superior Court decision underscores the importance of precise lease drafting. In Malleum Real Estate v. Donut Monster, the court held that tenant obligations began on the fixed commencement date&mdash;regardless of unfinished landlord improvements or pandemic disruptions. The ruling highlights that assumptions cannot override clear lease terms and offers practical lessons for both landlords and tenants.

Sakina Babwani	OBA Council, Toronto Regional Member
Jordan Fremont	Pensions and Benefits Law – Member at Large
Ethan Schiff	Class Actions Law – Member at Large
Kathleen Wang	International Law – Member at Large
Venetia Whiting	Environmental Law – Vice-Chair

Five Bennett Jones Lawyers Elected or Elevated to the Ontario Bar Association

From the Same Authors