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

Osie Ukwuoma

Corporate Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Partner

Jeffrey Kerbel

Securities & Business Lawyer | M&A, Finance & Governance

Senior Counsel

Kristopher R. Hanc

M&A and Capital Markets Lawyer

On November 19, 2024, the Ontario Capital Markets Tribunal (Tribunal) released its reasons for its July 2024 decision granting an application by Riot Platforms, Inc. (Riot) to cease trade a shareholder rights plan (Plan) adopted by Bitfarms Ltd. (Bitfarms). This decision is significant as it refined the test for the granting of an order “in the public interest” under section 127 of the Securities Act (Ontario) (the Act), at least as it applied to shareholder rights plans. The decision also demonstrated the unwillingness of the Tribunal to allow a shareholder rights plan to have a trigger below 20 percent.

Ontario Tribunal Refines Public Interest Test in Cease Trade Decision on Shareholder Rights Plans

Robert W. Staley

Securities & Commercial Litigation Lawyer | Shareholder Disputes

Vice Chair and Partner

COVID and Annual Shareholder Meetings

COVID-19 and Annual Shareholder Meetings

Nicholas P. Fader

Corporate & Public Markets Lawyer | M&A, Debt & Equity

Partner and General Counsel

Brent W. Kraus

Corporate Governance Lawyer | Securities & Capital Markets

Co-Head of Mergers & Acquisitions Services

For close to three months, M&A lawyers and other capital markets participants had been anxiously awaiting the release of written reasons from the Ontario Securities Commission (“OSC”) and the Financial and Consumer Affairs Authority of Saskatchewan (“FCAAS” and, together with the OSC, the “Commissions”) for their December 22, 2017 orders (collectively, “CanniMed Order”) in the matter of Aurora Cannabis Inc. (“Aurora”) and CanniMed Therapeutics Inc. (“CanniMed”). The Commissions' written decision (released on March 15, 2018) is of considerable interest, as the Aurora/CanniMed proceeding engaged a number of key provisions of the new takeover bid rules introduced in May 2016 (the "New Rules") and represented the first time securities regulators have had to address elements of the New Rules in the context of contested applications.

Securities Commissions Provide Guidance on New Takeover Rules in Hostile Cannabis Bid

Jon C. Truswell

Corporate & M&A Lawyer | Equity, Debt & Governance

Transactions between related parties may create material conflicts of interest between an issuer and its directors, officers and related parties. In particular, material conflicts of interest may arise in the context of insider bids, issuer bids, business combinations and related party transactions. Multilateral Instrument 61-101 Protection of Minority Security Holders in Special Transactions (MI 61-101) was adopted in Alberta, Manitoba and New Brunswick on July 31, 2017, and prescribes procedural safeguards intended to mitigate the risks to minority security holders in material conflict of interest transactions. MI 61-101 has been in effect in Ontario and Québec since February 1, 2008, when it superseded Rule 61-501 in Ontario and Regulation Q-27 in Quebec.

CSA Provide Guidance on the Review of Material Conflict of Interest Transactions

Canadian Securities Administrators Provide Guidance on the Review of Material Conflict of Interest Transactions

Christine Plante

Employment Lawyer | HR Legal Counsel

Sara G. Parchello

Employment Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Tami Oguntona

Articling Student at Bennett Jones in Calgary 

Articling Student 

Bill C-31 proposes significant amendments to the Canada Labour Code that would prohibit most post-employment non-compete clauses and potentially other employment-related restrictions in federally regulated workplaces. While the legislation has not yet been enacted, employers should begin assessing the potential impact of the proposed changes, including the limited exemptions available for certain business transactions and senior executive roles.

Restricting Covenants in Federal Workplaces

Proposed Updates to Canada Labour Code Expected To Prohibit Post-Employment Restrictive Covenants

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.

Jeff Kerbel in Law Times Focus on Changed Takeover Laws in Canada

From the Same Authors