People

Services

Industries

Firm

About

Knowledge

Careers

News

Events

Contact

Connect

Privacy Policy

Manage Cookies

Disclaimer

Terms of Use

Accessibility

Payments

Legal

Calgary

Toronto

Edmonton

Ottawa

Vancouver

New York

Montréal

Robert W. Staley

Securities & Commercial Litigation Lawyer | Shareholder Disputes

Vice Chair and Partner

Cheryl M. Woodin

Commercial Litigation & Trial Lawyer

Partner

Ciara J. Mackey

Commercial Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

Research and Opinions, National Practice Group Leader

In Sinclair v. Venezia Turismo, 2025 SCC 27, the Supreme Court of Canada clarified that jurisdiction must be assessed for each defendant individually. A plaintiff cannot rely on one defendant&rsquo;s contract or weak connecting factors to extend jurisdiction to others. The decision strengthens the principles of corporate separateness in cross-border disputes.

The SCC Clarifies Approach to Jurisdiction Against Multiple Defendants in Cross Border Disputes

Sinclair v. Venezia Turismo: The SCC Clarifies Approach to Jurisdiction Against Multiple Defendants in Cross-Border Disputes

Michael D. Mysak KC

Corporate & Commercial Litigation Lawyer

David R. McKinnon

Energy & Environmental Litigation Counsel

In the glow of negotiating a commercial lease, no landlord or tenant wants to think about how it might end early. But recent developments again remind us that a nuanced termination clause will significantly affect if, when and how a termination right is triggered.

Lease Termination Clauses

Lease Termination Clauses: Know the Target Before Pulling the Trigger

Andrew N. Disipio

Mining & Corporate Finance Lawyer | M&A, Equity & Debt Deals

Doug Fenton

Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

The latest dispute in the asset deal between Spacebridge Inc. and Baylin Technologies Inc.1 is a stark warning to anyone delivering a notice of indemnification claim against funds held in escrow.

No Space for Error Invalid Indemnity Claim in Asset Transaction Failed to Follow Notice Terms

No Space for Error: Invalid Indemnity Claim in Asset Transaction Failed to Follow Notice Terms

David J. Wahl, FCIArb

Construction Arbitration & Litigation Lawyer

Alison G. FitzGerald

International Arbitration Lawyer

In its recent decision in <a rel="noopener noreferrer" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.canlii.org/en/ab/abkb/doc/2024/2024abkb317/2024abkb317.html" target="_blank">Quanta Canada Holdings II ULC v Bremar Construction Ltd</a><a rel="noopener noreferrer" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.canlii.org/en/ab/abkb/doc/2024/2024abkb317/2024abkb317.html" target="_blank">, 2024 ABKB 317</a>, the Alberta Court of King's Bench established a principled framework for considering an application for permission to appeal an arbitral award under sections 44(2) and 44(2.1) of the Arbitration Act. In Alberta, if the governing arbitration agreement does not provide a broader right of appeal, permission to appeal under section 44 is limited to questions of law where the importance to the parties of the matters at stake in the arbitration justifies an appeal and the determination of the question of law at issue will significantly affect the parties' rights.

Dancing the Two Step to Appeal an Arbitration Award in Alberta

Dancing the Two-Step to Appeal an Arbitration Award in Alberta

J. Sébastien A. Gittens

Technology Lawyer & Trademark Agent

Tech & Data, National Practice Group Leader 

Suzie Suliman

Commercial Transactions Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Associate, Trademark Agent

Kees de Ridder

Technology, IP & Privacy Lawyer | Patents, Licensing & Cyber

Partner, Patent Agent, Trademark Agent

The Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada has released draft guidance outlining best practices for organizations to assess the privacy practices of third-party service providers under PIPEDA. The guidance emphasizes that privacy due diligence is an ongoing accountability obligation, with particular attention to data flows, AI and training data, security, subcontractors, international transfers and data retention.

OPC Issues New PIPEDA Guidance on Assessing Third-Party Service Providers

Ashley M. White

Corporate & Commercial Transactions Lawyer | Power & Energy

Martin Ignasiak KC

Energy & Industrial Projects Lawyer

Head of Energy Regulatory

Nathan Murray

Energy Regulatory, Environmental & Administrative Lawyer

Associate

Canada has amended the Physical Activities Regulations to remove certain intraprovincial energy projects and Canada Energy Regulator-regulated facilities from the federal Impact Assessment Act Project List. The changes are intended to reduce regulatory duplication, timelines and costs while providing greater certainty for proponents, while other federal environmental and emissions requirements remain applicable.

Government of Canada Reduces the Scope of the Project List under the Impact Assessment

Government of Canada Reduces the Scope of the Project List under the Impact Assessment Act

Jessica Kennedy

Regulatory Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

Jennifer (Jenn) K. Choi

Commercial Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Vancouver

On July 15, 2026, British Columbia and Simpcw First Nation entered into a consent-based decision-making agreement under the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act (DRIPA) for the environmental assessment of the Yellowhead Copper Project. The Agreement requires Simpcw consent for the project to proceed and establishes a framework for parallel provincial and Indigenous environmental assessments. Its potential application to future mining projects in Simpcw&rsquo;s traditional territory highlights the evolving role of Indigenous consent in major resource development projects in British Columbia.

BC Signs DRIPA Consent Agreement Requiring Simpcw Consent for Yellowhead Copper Project

BC Signs DRIPA Agreement Requiring Simpcw Consent for Yellowhead Copper Project

Katherine Booth

Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Vancouver

The BC Court of Appeal in Cleaver v. The Cadillac Fairview Corporation Limited upheld the refusal to certify a privacy class action, finding no basis in fact for the claim&rsquo;s central allegation. The decision reinforces the courts&rsquo; gatekeeping role at certification and the importance of evidentiary support for the core allegations underlying a proposed class proceeding.

BC Court of Appeal No basis in fact no class action

BC Court of Appeal: No Basis in Fact = No Class Action 

Michael C. Smith

George W. H. Reid

International Trade, Investment and Public Procurement Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

The Government of Canada has published a new Notice concerning the rules and procedures governing the administration of the quota for imports of electric vehicles from the People's Republic of China for the second period of Quota Year 1 (September 1, 2026 to February 28, 2027). The Notice, issued by Global Affairs Canada under the Export and Import Permits Act, confirms that the second allocation period will continue to operate similar to the first allocation period.&nbsp;

Scott Bower and Ciara Toole Blog Quoted in Financial Post on Hague Convention Rules

From the Same Authors