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

Sarah E. Gilbert

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

Partner

Gatlin Smeijers

Environmental Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Julia E. Schatz

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

Partner 

On June 5, 2025, the Competition Bureau (the Bureau) published its <a rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://competition-bureau.canada.ca/en/how-we-foster-competition/education-and-outreach/publications/environmental-claims-and-competition-act#sec02-2" target="_blank">final Guidelines for environmental claims</a> under the Competition Act (the Act). The Guidelines were created to help businesses and the public understand the Bureau's approach to deceptive marketing provisions under the Act as they relate to environmental claims, including with respect to the new environment-specific provisions that were enacted in 2024. While not binding on the Commissioner of Competition nor the Competition Tribunal, the Guidelines provide visibility into the Bureau's interpretation and approach to environmental claims.

Final Guidelines From the Competition Bureau on Environmental Claims in Canada

Final Guidelines from the Competition Bureau on Environmental Claims in Canada

Samantha Chenatte

Associate at Bennett Jones Vancouver

Associate

On March 7, 2025, Health Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) published two consultation documents as part of its ongoing work to clarify which categories of pest control products are subject to the Pest Control Products Act (PCPA) and the Pest Control Products Regulations (PCPR) passed under it, which products are exempt and which may be authorized (without registration being required). The PMRA is seeking further stakeholder input on the amendments being proposed. The comment period is open until May 6, 2025.

Pest Management Regulatory Agency Opens Pre Consultation Period on Proposed Changes

Pest Management Regulatory Agency Opens Pre-Consultation Period on Proposed Changes to the Pest Control Products Regulations

The Government of Canada published the final "State of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) report" (<a rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/evaluating-existing-substances/state-per-polyfluoroalkyl-substances-report.html" target="_blank">State of PFAS Report</a>), the "Risk management approach for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), excluding fluoropolymers" (<a rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/evaluating-existing-substances/risk-management-approach-per-polyfluoroalkyl-substances.html" target="_blank">Risk Management Approach</a>) and a proposed Order adding a toxic substance to Part 2 of Schedule 1 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA) (<a rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://canadagazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p1/2025/2025-03-08/html/reg2-eng.html" target="_blank">Proposed Order</a>) in the Canada Gazette on March 8, 2025.  These documents are open for public consultation until May 7, 2025.

Federal Government publishes State of PFAS Report and Risk Management Approach

Federal Government Publishes State of PFAS Report and Risk Management Approach

The Federal Court has ordered the review of another Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) decision, spotlighting how the regulatory agency handles new scientific evidence in the renewal process for pesticides in Canada. This decision builds on jurisprudence from the Federal Court of Appeal that challenged the PMRA’s refusal to establish a review panel in the face of a notice of objection regarding the PMRA’s re-evaluation of the pesticide glyphosate (see our blog from February 2022, <a href="/Insights/Blogs/The-Federal-Court-of-Appeal-Has-Weighed-in-on-ReEvaluation-Decisions">The Federal Court of Appeal Has Weighed in on Re-Evaluation Decisions Made by the Pest Management Regulatory Agency</a>, which reviews that decision in more detail).

Federal Court Orders Review of PMRA Decision Renewing Glyphosate Pesticide

Benjamin K. Reingold

Intellectual Property Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

Makda Yohannes

Commercial Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Stephen D. Burns

Technology Lawyer, Intellectual Property Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

Partner, Trademark Agent

As artificial intelligence becomes increasingly integrated into creative workflows, the use of typefaces and fonts raises complex intellectual property challenges. This article examines the distinction between typefaces and fonts, the scope of copyright, trademark and industrial design protection in Canada, and how AI tools may heighten infringement risks. It also outlines practical steps for designers and businesses to ensure compliance through proper licensing and responsible AI use.

Understanding IP Infringement Risk in Typeface Use in AI Generated Content

Understanding IP Infringement Risk in Typeface Use in AI-Generated Content

Lisa Kakoske

Corporate and Securities Lawyer

Globally, women represent nearly half of the agricultural workforce, yet they still face systemic barriers that prevent them from accessing, using and contributing to innovations in agricultural technology (Agritech), which is poised to transform agricultural systems across the world.

Gender Inclusivity Driving Growth in Agritech Industry

Sara G. Parchello

Employment Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

David Cassin

Brendan J. Weiler

Employment Services Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Two recent Ontario Superior Court decisions&mdash;Li v Wayfair Canada Inc. and Jones v Strides Toronto&mdash;clarify that the phrase &ldquo;at any time&rdquo; in a termination clause does not automatically invalidate an employment agreement under the ESA. While both cases distinguish earlier restrictive rulings, ongoing inconsistencies, including the Chan decision, highlight the need for appellate guidance. Employers should continue to review contracts carefully to ensure ESA compliance.

Termination At Any Time A Review of Recent Developments

Termination “At Any Time”? A Review of Recent Developments from Li v Wayfair Canada Inc. and Jones v Strides Toronto

Mykala Way

Commercial Real Estate Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Jane C. Helmstadter

Real Estate Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

The Ontario Court of Appeal&rsquo;s decision in 100 Bloor Street West Corporation v. Barry&rsquo;s Bootcamp Canada Inc. underscores the risks of vague realty tax provisions in commercial leases. The case highlights how inconsistent or ambiguous calculation methods can expose both landlords and tenants to costly litigation. Clear, consistent, and fair drafting of tax allocation clauses is essential to avoid disputes and ensure predictable outcomes.

One Method Many Taxes Lease Interpretation and Realty Tax

One Method, Many Taxes: Lease Interpretation and Realty Tax Allocation in 100 Bloor Street West v. Barry’s Bootcamp

Michelle F. Yung

Real Estate Lawyer at Bennett Jones Vancouver

Vanessa Kiraly

A recent Ontario Superior Court decision underscores the importance of precise lease drafting. In Malleum Real Estate v. Donut Monster, the court held that tenant obligations began on the fixed commencement date&mdash;regardless of unfinished landlord improvements or pandemic disruptions. The ruling highlights that assumptions cannot override clear lease terms and offers practical lessons for both landlords and tenants.

Case Comment: Abonyi v. Oxford (County)

From the Same Authors