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

Jennifer A. Miller KC

Occupational Health & Safety (OHS) and Employment Lawyer at Bennett Jones Edmonton

Partner

Jenna Vivian

Commercial Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Edmonton

Associate

Beth L. Jonah

On January 23, 2025, the New Brunswick Court of Appeal released its decision in King v R. This tragic case highlights critical lessons for employers, emphasizing the importance of leadership accountability, adherence to safety protocols and a proactive approach to managing high-risk activities. This decision arose from the drowning of 18-year-old Michael Henderson in a confined space on a construction site in Fredericton, leading to the conviction of Jason King, his supervisor, for criminal negligence causing death.

Just Released OHS Lessons for Employers from King v R 2025 NBCA 12

Just Released: OHS Lessons for Employers from King v. R., 2025 NBCA 12

Matt Riskin

Commercial Litigation, Health and Employment Lawyer at Bennett Jones Edmonton

In an age where technology makes recording conversations easy and common, a recent wrongful dismissal case (Wan v H&R Block Canada Inc., <a rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.canlii.org/en/ab/abkb/doc/2024/2024abkb734/2024abkb734.html?resultId=d48fdd0c45c4457cb994e559bdd57032&searchId=2025-01-23T09:08:46:744/7ac350c01d0647318bfe1d1df149d807&searchUrlHash=AAAAAQAqcmVjb3JkaW5nIGF0IHRoZSB3b3JrcGxhY2Ugd2l0aG91dCBjb25zZW50AAAAAAE" target="_blank">2024 ABKB 734</a>) raises important questions about privacy, workplace ethics and the boundaries of “for cause” termination. The matter offers insight into the complexity surrounding after-acquired cause—that is, justifying a dismissal based on evidence discovered after the termination decision.

When is Recording at Work Grounds for Dismissal A Case of Nuance and Context

When is Recording at Work Grounds for Dismissal? A Case of Nuance and Context

James J. Heelan KC

Commercial/Securities Litigation, Employment and Professional Negligence Lawyer and Mediator at Bennett Jones Edmonton

Laura Inglis

Sarah J. Huot

Litigation, Professional Negligence, Health, Employment and Estate Lawyer at Bennett Jones Edmonton

Employee restrictive covenants are often a contentious issue, especially when employees leave to form (or join) competing firms. A recent Alberta Court of King’s Bench decision, People Corporation v Quinn et al. (<a rel="noopener noreferrer" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.canlii.org/en/ab/abkb/doc/2024/2024abkb711/2024abkb711.html" target="_blank">2024 ABKB 711</a>), offers valuable insights into how courts balance the enforceability of restrictive covenants, employee rights, and employer interests. This case revolves around allegations of breach of restrictive covenants and the legal intricacies involved in assessing their validity.

Legal Precedent on Restrictive Covenants in Employment Agreements A Case Study

Legal Precedent on Restrictive Covenants in Employment Agreements—A Case Study

Krishen Singh

Commercial Litigation and Health Lawyer at Bennett Jones Edmonton

Varun Kapoor

Corporate Commercial Lawyer at Bennett Jones Edmonton

In the case of Van Hee v Glenmore Inn Holdings Ltd., 2023 ABCJ 244, Justice L.L. Burt of the Alberta Court of Justice (the Court) held that an employer was justified in unilaterally placing an employee on an unpaid leave of absence due to their failure to comply with the employer's COVID-19 vaccination policy. The Court concluded that the unpaid leave was not a constructive dismissal. The Court’s decision further affirms the use of mandatory vaccination policies in the employment and pandemic context.

Fundamental Breach or Reasonable Balance Alberta Court Affirms Employers Mandatory COVID19

Fundamental Breach or Reasonable Balance? Alberta Court Affirms Employer's Mandatory COVID-19 Vaccination Policy

William S. Osler KC

Capital Markets, Securities, M&A and Corporate Governance Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

Mia Bacic

Corporate and Securities Lawyer at Bennett Jones Vancouver

Ali J. Naushahi

Securities, Corporate Finance, Mergers and Acquisitions and Mining Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

The CSA has released proposed amendments to NI 52-112 to align disclosure requirements with IFRS 18. The changes would update the definition of non-GAAP financial measures to include management-defined performance measures, introduce prominence requirements for additional subtotals disclosed outside financial statements, and allow certain information to be incorporated by reference. Comments are invited until February 11, 2026.

CSA Requests Comments on Proposed Amendments

CSA Requests Comments on Proposed Amendments to Non-GAAP and Other Financial Measures Disclosure Requirements

Brian P. Reid

Litigation, Construction, Joint Venture Agreement and Builder's Lien Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

Christopher Petrucci

Commercial Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

Kaamil Khalfan

This article examines a recent Alberta Court decision confirming that during the PPCLA transition period, the former BLA&rsquo;s shorter 45-day lien deadline remains decisive. The ruling underscores that once a lien deadline expires, the lien ceases to exist and cannot be revived by the Court or through Land Titles corrections.

Better Early Than Sorry Strict Compliance Required for Lien Deadlines

Better Early Than Sorry: Strict Compliance Required for Lien Deadlines 

Robert W. Staley

Commercial, Securities and Class Action Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Vice Chair and Partner

Amanda C. McLachlan

Securities Litigation, Regulatory Investigations and Financial Crimes Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Doug Fenton

Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

The Ontario Court of Appeal&rsquo;s decision in Binance v. OSC clarifies the limits of the OSC&rsquo;s investigative powers and the Charter protections available in securities investigations. While the Court rejected a constitutional right to challenge a summons before compliance, it found the summons issued to Binance overbroad and unconstitutional. The ruling offers important guidance for market participants on regulatory scrutiny, the scope of document production, and the viability of judicial review.

Court of Appeal Addresses Scope of Charter Review in Securities Investigations

Binance v. OSC: Court of Appeal Addresses Scope of Charter Review in Securities Investigations 

Katelyn Weller

Counsel at Bennett Jones Toronto

Counsel

Carl Cunningham

Management-side Employment Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

The 2025 Federal Budget proposes significant employment law changes, including restrictions on non-compete agreements and new measures to address worker misclassification and wage theft. Federally regulated employers should prepare for upcoming consultations in early 2026.

Federal Budget Proposals Affecting Employers

Andrew Bozzato

Corporate, M&A, Securities Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Simon Grant

Banking & Finance Lawyer, Fintech Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Partner 

Matthew Flynn

Technology Transaction Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Canada's federal budget was released on November 4, 2025 and included some much-anticipated news for fintech. In this latest edition of our Fintech in Canada quarterly update, we look at the key announcements in Budget 2025 for the sector, including the unleashing of stablecoins, fintech-focused changes to financial legislation and momentum for open banking and how fintechs can navigate the evolving landscape.&nbsp;

2018 Bennett Jones Employment Symposium - Second Session

From the Same Authors