People

Services

Industries

Firm

About

Knowledge

Careers

News

Events

Contact

Connect

Privacy Policy

Manage Cookies

Disclaimer

Terms of Use

Accessibility

Payments

Legal

Calgary

Toronto

Edmonton

Ottawa

Vancouver

New York

Montréal

Cheryl M. Woodin

Commercial Litigation & Trial Lawyer

Partner

Emrys Davis

 Partner and Class Actions National Practice Group Leader

Kolding Larson

Commercial Transactions Lawyer

Associate

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 

Melanie L. Aitken

Antitrust & Competition Law Advisor

Managing Principal, Bennett Jones (US) LLP

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 Sets

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

Robert W. Staley

Securities & Commercial Litigation Lawyer | Shareholder Disputes

Vice Chair and Partner

Ciara J. Mackey

Commercial Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

Research and Opinions, National Practice Group Leader

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

Matthew Flynn

Technology Transaction Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Simon Grant

Financial Services & Regulatory Lawyer

Partner 

The Canadian Securities Administrators has once again extended the deadline for registered crypto-trading platforms to address trading in value referenced crypto assets (VRCAs). VRCAs, better known as "stablecoins", are crypto assets designed to maintain a stable or pegged value relative to a specified fiat currency or other asset. Stablecoins have become popular with crypto investors and are frequently used to facilitate the trading, borrowing and lending of other crypto assets.

Fintech in Canada Q3 2024

Carl Cunningham

Management-side Employment Lawyer

David Cassin

Employment Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Julia Horowitz

Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

In Wigdor v. Facebook Canada Ltd., 2026 ONCA 572, the Ontario Court of Appeal clarified that equity-based compensation, including RSUs, may constitute a term or condition of employment that must be preserved during the statutory notice period under the Employment Standards Act, 2000. The decision highlights the need for employers to carefully review RSU forfeiture provisions and saving language to ensure compliance with employment standards legislation, while confirming that the threshold for punitive damages remains high.

RSU Forfeiture Revisited Ontario Court of Appeal Provides Important Guidance for Employers

RSU Forfeiture Revisited: Ontario Court of Appeal Provides Important Guidance for Employers

Alison G. FitzGerald

International Arbitration Lawyer

George W. H. Reid

International Trade, Investment and Public Procurement Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Sabrina A. Bandali

International Trade, Regulatory and Investment Lawyer

Canada has introduced a new round of retaliatory tariffs on $27.6 billion worth of US goods in response to the Trump administration's 50% tariffs on Canadian exports. The measures, effective September 8, 2026, include surtaxes ranging from 15% to 50% on a wide range of products, alongside remission programs and duty relief mechanisms for affected businesses.

Canadas Response to Trump Tariffs and Relief Measures

Canada's Response to Trump: Tariffs and Relief Measures

Lucas Stevens-Hall

Corporate Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

The Bank of Canada has published its first enforcement decisions under the Retail Payment Activities Act (RPAA), all involving unregistered payment service providers and $0 administrative monetary penalties. The decisions provide early insight into the Bank&rsquo;s enforcement approach and highlight the importance of registration, proactive remediation and ongoing RPAA compliance.

Bank Of Canada Publishes First RPAApaa Enforcement Decisions Against Payment Service Providers

Bank Of Canada Publishes First RPAA Enforcement Decisions Against Payment Service Providers

Talia K. Bregman

Employment Services, National Practice Group Leader

After a series of conflicting decisions, the Court of Appeal for Ontario has clarified the enforceability of termination clauses in Ontario employment agreements through its recent decision in the dual appeals in Baker v Van Dolder&rsquo;s Home Team Inc. and Li v Wayfair Canada ULC.

At Any Time and for Any Reason is Here to Stay

Ontario Court of Appeal Restores Common Sense to Termination Clauses in Ontario Employment Agreements

"At Any Time" and "For Any Reason" is Here to Stay

Michelle F. Yung

Real Estate Lawyer at Bennett Jones Vancouver

Andrew L. Jeanrie

Real Estate & Municipal Law Lawyer | Development & Approvals

Nathalie Hunter Heighington

Associate at Bennett Jones Vancouver

Part II of this three-part series examines Build Canada Homes&rsquo; Investment Policy Framework, including its priorities, eligible housing projects and partnership models. It explores how project readiness, affordability, scale, modular construction and cross-sector collaboration may position commercial real estate proponents to participate in BCH initiatives.

Part II How Build Canada Homes

Part II How Build Canada Homes Works: Investment Framework, Eligibility and Partnerships

Title Alphabetical

Title

normal

Yaiguaje v. Chevron Corporation: Enforcing and Ecuadorian Judgment Against a U.S. Company in Ontario

From the Same Authors