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

Robert W. Staley

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

Vice Chair and Partner

Cheryl M. Woodin

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

Partner

Ciara J. Mackey

Commercial Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

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

Corporate, Fraud and Securities Litigation and Shareholder Dispute Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

David R. McKinnon

Energy & Environmental Litigation, Commercial Disputes, and Health Law at Bennett Jones Calgary

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

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

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 at Bennett Jones Calgary

Alison G. FitzGerald

International Arbitration Lawyer at Bennett Jones Ottawa

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

Oliver Loxley

Corporate Lawyer at Bennett Jones Vancouver

Dom Sorbara

Banking & Financial Services Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

In the context of corporate debt, 'liability management' refers to a company taking steps to manage its existing debt obligations. This often involves a combination of one or more open market repurchases, redemptions/repayments, consent solicitations, tender offers or exchange offers and may involve other transactions. A repurchase of debt from a holder is one of the most straight-forward examples of liability management.

Liability Management in Canada

Andrew Bozzato

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

Bishoy Attia

Articling Student at Bennett Jones in Toronto

Articling Student

Private investment in the defence sector is accelerating as governments realign policy priorities and expand support for dual-use and DefTech innovation. Canada&rsquo;s 2025 Budget and long-term spending commitments are reshaping the industry, driving new opportunities across AI, cyber, space, advanced manufacturing and critical infrastructure. With global capital flowing into defence technology and structural reforms underway to modernize procurement, the sector is rapidly transitioning from fragmented to fully investable.

Policy Dual Use and DefTech Drive a New Era for Private Capital in Defence

Policy, Dual-Use and DefTech Drive a New Era for Private Capital in Defence

Daron K. Naffin

Energy, Environmental/Regulatory and Expropriation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

Tim Myers

Regulatory, Environmental, Aboriginal and Expropriation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

Thomas Machell

Regulatory Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

Associate

On November 4, 2025, the Alberta Energy Regulator released AERH2S, an updated version of its computer model for calculating Emergency Planning Zones (EPZs) for sour gas applications. AERH2S replaces the longstanding ERCBH2S model and is available for immediate use by industry. According to AER Bulletin 2025-34, the use of AERH2S will become mandatory for all applications filed under Directive 056: Energy Development Applications and Schedules, including amendment applications, starting January 1, 2026. The continued use of ERCBH2S is permitted for updates to existing EPZs (and any EPZs established before January 1, 2026) under Directive 071: Emergency Preparedness and Response until further notice.

Alberta Energy Regulator Releases New AERH2S Model for Sour Gas Operations

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

Edwin G. Kroft KC

Tax Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones

Antoine Messervier

Tax Lawyer at Bennett Jones Vancouver

Anna Lekach

Tax Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

The November 2025 issue of Bennett Jones on Tax Disputes explores major developments in Canadian tax law, including new CRA guidance on the Voluntary Disclosures Program, court decisions on settlement confidentiality and costs, and proposed reforms to the Tax Court&rsquo;s informal procedure limits. The issue also features case summaries and insights from Bennett Jones&rsquo; tax litigators on emerging trends in tax dispute resolution.

Stem Cell Network Annual General Meeting 2009

From the Same Authors