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

Robert W. Staley

Securities & Commercial Litigation Lawyer | Shareholder Disputes

Vice Chair and Partner

Doug Fenton

Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Partner

Sophia DiNicolo

Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Associate 

The Ontario Superior Court in <em>Dziedziejko v Canopy Growth</em> held that materiality may be inferred from a significant share price drop following corrective disclosure, granting leave to pursue secondary market misrepresentation claims. The decision signals a potential shift from contextual materiality analysis and raises challenges for issuers with volatile share prices.<br />
<div>&nbsp;</div>

Inferring Materiality from Share Price Movement Dziedziejko v Canopy Growth

Inferring Materiality from Share Price Movement: Dziedziejko v Canopy Growth

Kristopher R. Hanc

M&A and Capital Markets Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

John Lawless

Private Equity, M&A, Corporate and Securities Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

James D. Beeby

Corporate Finance, M&A, Private Equity and Venture Capital Lawyer

<p>The Supreme Court of Canada has released its much-anticipated decision in Lundin Mining Corp. v. Markowich, 2025 SCC 39, clarifying the definition of a "material change" under securities law and providing guidance on when a public company must disclose information to the market. The decision will have broad implications for public companies, their directors, officers, shareholders and other market participants.</p>

Supreme Court of Canada Clarifies Scope of Securities Disclosure Obligations for Material Changes

Shifting Grounds: Supreme Court of Canada Clarifies Scope of Securities Disclosure Obligations for "Material Changes"

Amanda C. McLachlan

Corporate & Regulatory Lawyer | Disputes, Investigations & Compliance

The Ontario Court of Appeal&rsquo;s decision in <em>Binance v. OSC</em> 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 

David Cassin

Employment Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

In McPherson v Global Growth Assets Inc., the Ontario Superior Court interpreted the no-reprisal provisions of the Securities Act for the first time, awarding more than $5.3 million to a CEO who was terminated after raising compliance concerns. The decision underscores the strength of the Act&rsquo;s protections for employees who engage in protected activities and highlights the significant risk to employers of taking disciplinary action without clear, documented justification.

Ontario Securities Act No Reprisal Provisions Results in 53 Million Award to CEO

Ontario Securities Act No-Reprisal Provisions Results in C$5.3 Million Award to CEO: A Warning to Regulated Employers

Artem N. Barsukov FCIArb

International Arbitration Lawyer

Edward W. Hulshof

Commercial Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Vancouver

Associate

Paige Lutz

Articling Student at Bennett Jones Vancouver

Articling Student

The Alberta Court of Appeal clarified that broadly worded arbitration clauses can extend to statutory claims, including those under the Tort-Feasors Act. Overturning the uncertainty created by Orica, the Court confirmed that parties will be held to their agreement to arbitrate, even where claims arise by operation of law. The decision reinforces commercial certainty and helps avoid parallel proceedings and inconsistent outcomes.

Alberta Court of Appeal Provides Antidote to Consternation on Scope of Arbitration Clauses

Cheryl M. Woodin

Commercial Litigation & Trial Lawyer

Emrys Davis

Competition & Antitrust Litigation Lawyer

Kolding Larson

Commercial Transactions Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

The Federal Court dismissed a proposed C$5B class action alleging a nationwide conspiracy to fix generic drug prices, finding no basis in fact and denying certification. The decision underscores the Court&rsquo;s gatekeeping role and confirms that US enforcement actions and generalized market theories are insufficient to support competition claims in Canada without clear, particularized evidence.

Federal Court Dismisses 5 Billion Generic Drug Price Fixing Class Action

Federal Court Dismisses C$5 Billion Generic Drug Price-Fixing Class Action 

Edwin G. Kroft KC

Tax Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones

Andrew Young

Tax Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Mackenzie Thomas

<p>Issue 41 of Bennett Jones on Tax Disputes examines recent developments in Canadian tax litigation, with a focus on jurisdictional limits, procedural compliance, and case management in the Tax Court of Canada. Featuring commentary from members of the Bennett Jones Tax group, this edition analyzes key decisions including MEGlobal, Culig, and Opheim, and provides practical guidance for taxpayers and advisors navigating tax disputes.</p>

Bennett Jones on Tax Disputes Issue 41

Bennett Jones on Tax Disputes: March 2026

Renée Gagnon

Maruska Giacchetto

British Columbia&rsquo;s new Health Professions and Occupations Act will significantly reshape how health professionals are regulated, with changes taking effect April 1, 2026. This blog outlines key updates, including a new oversight body, updated bylaws and expanded statutory duties for licensees.

New Health Professions and Occupations Act is Coming Soon

What BC Health Professionals Need to Know Before April 1, 2026 

Oliver Loxley

Corporate Lawyer at Bennett Jones Vancouver

Aaron E. Sonshine

Corporate Finance, Mergers and Acquisitions and Corporate Governance Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Partner 

Alexandra Doane

Articling Student at Bennett Jones in Vancouver

The SEC&rsquo;s March 5 exemption preserves the existing insider reporting framework for Canadian foreign private issuers that report through SEDI, despite changes introduced by the HFIAA. This update clarifies cross-border reporting obligations and maintains the status quo for affected issuers and their insiders.

Canadian Foreign Private Issuers Remain Exempt from US Insider Reporting Requirements

Shareholder Rights, Disputes and Remedies

From the Same Authors