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

Jenna Vivian

Commercial Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Edmonton

Associate

Matt Riskin

Commercial Litigation, Health and Employment Lawyer at Bennett Jones Edmonton

Partner

The Alberta Court of King&rsquo;s Bench has released a detailed and instructive decision on after-acquired cause, employee dishonesty and proportionality in termination for cause, particularly in the context of a closely held business and a senior executive role.

Alberta Court Confirms After Acquired Cause Can Justify Termination for Cause

Sobolewski v Advanced Completions Technology Services Ltd, 2026 ABKB 10

Dishonesty at the Top: Alberta Court Confirms After-Acquired Cause Can Justify Termination for Cause

Michael H. VanderMeer

Employment Services Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

Homa Aminnejad

Articling Student at Bennett Jones Calgary

Articling Student

In a recent decision, the Court of King’s Bench of Alberta upheld a freely negotiated termination clause with a sophisticated employee despite evolution to the employee’s role over the term of employment. The employee’s experience and involvement in the negotiations may also be used to resolve any apparent ambiguity in the termination clause.

Employment Termination Clauses Lessons From Singh v Clark Builders

Employment Termination Clauses: Lessons From Singh v Clark Builders

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

Christine A. Viney

Commercial Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

Margaret (Meg) Bennett

Commercial Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Kaamil Khalfan

The Supreme Court of Canada&rsquo;s decision in Emond v Trillium Mutual Insurance Co clarifies how insurance policies are interpreted when endorsements enhancing coverage conflict with policy exclusions. The Court confirmed that a guaranteed rebuilding cost endorsement does not extend coverage to costs expressly excluded, highlighting potential gaps for homeowners and the importance of reviewing policies holistically.

Emond Rebuilding Dreams or Interpreting Realities The Supreme Court Weighs In

Emond: Rebuilding Dreams or Interpreting Realities? The Supreme Court Weighs In

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

Tinashe Muzah

Articling Student at Bennett Jones in Calgary 

The CSA has finalized amendments and ongoing initiatives to modernize continuous disclosure for investment funds, aimed at streamlining requirements, reducing regulatory burden, and improving investor clarity.

CSA Continues Work to Modernize Continuous Disclosure for Investment Funds

Sarah E. Gilbert

Regulatory, Environmental and Health and Safety Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Julia E. Schatz

Commercial Litigation, Agribusiness, Arbitration, Real Estate, Construction and Environmental Litigation at Bennett Jones Toronto

Partner 

Gatlin Smeijers

Environmental Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

On December 31, 2025, the Federal Government published the Prohibition of Certain Toxic Substances Regulations, 2025 under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999. When they come into effect on June 30, 2026, the 2025 Regulations will repeal and replace the Prohibition of Certain Toxic Substances Regulations, 2012. The Federal Government published a proposed version of the 2025 Regulations in 2022 for public consultation.

Federal Government Publishes Prohibition of Certain Toxic Substances Regulations

Federal Government Publishes Prohibition of Certain Toxic Substances Regulations, 2025

Drew C. Broughton

Corporate Commercial and M&A Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

Audrix Arce

Articling Student 

Recent changes to the Commissioner of Lobbying&rsquo;s interpretation of the federal Lobbying Act significantly lower the threshold for mandatory lobbyist registration. As of January 2026, organizations may be required to register if employees collectively spend as little as eight hours lobbying within a four-week period, including preparation and written communications. This update has important compliance implications for corporations and other organizations engaging with federal public office holders.

Expanded Federal Lobbyist Registration Requirements

Melanie L. Aitken

Global Antitrust and Competition Law and Litigation Advisor at Bennett Jones Washington

Managing Principal, Bennett Jones (US) LLP

Cheryl M. Woodin

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

Emrys Davis

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

In Martin v. Alphabet, the Competition Tribunal issued its first decision interpreting the new public-interest pathway for private access under section 103.1(7) of the Competition Act. While affirming an intention to broaden access, the Tribunal articulated a flexible but rigorous three-part framework that places real weight on evidence, genuine interest and the applicant&rsquo;s capacity to prosecute complex competition cases. The decision underscores that public interest alone is insufficient without a coherent, Canada-focused evidentiary record and a credible litigation plan.

Martin v Alphabet Tribunal

Martin v. Alphabet: Tribunal Sets the Public Interest Leave Framework—Evidence and Capacity Now the Gatekeepers

Alberta Hotel & Lodging Association Annual Convention

From the Same Authors