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

Stephen D. Burns

Energy & Infrastructure Technology Lawyer | IT/OT & Markets

Partner, Trademark Agent

J. Sébastien A. Gittens

Technology Lawyer & Trademark Agent

Tech & Data, National Practice Group Leader 

Scott H. D. Bower KC

Corporate, Commercial, Securities and Energy Lawyer

Partner 

Canadian courts and law societies, alike, are faced with an ever-evolving challenge: straddling the line between recognizing the potential benefits of emergent generative artificial intelligence (GenAI), while balancing the associated risks of using this technology. Principle to these associated risks is the ability of GenAI to "hallucinate" (i.e., generate incorrect information).

Unchartered Territories Canadian Courts and Law Societies Grapple with the Use of Generative

Unchartered Territories: Canadian Courts and Law Societies Grapple with the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence Tools

Julia E. Schatz

Commercial & Regulatory Lawyer | Environmental & Agribusiness

The ability to extend a limitation period for an environmental claim is subject to considerable judicial discretion, the Court of Appeal of Alberta recently held in <a rel="noopener noreferrer" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.canlii.org/en/ab/abca/doc/2024/2024abca60/2024abca60.html" target="_blank">Paramount Resources Ltd v Grey Owl Engineering Ltd, 2024 ABCA 60</a>. Section 218 of Alberta's Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act, RSA 2000, c E-12 gives a judge discretion to extend a limitation period "where the basis for the proceeding is an alleged adverse effect resulting from the alleged release of a substance into the environment".  However, no extension was granted in the case of a claim for remediation costs against other alleged contributors to a pipeline spill.

Extending Discretion Balancing the Limitations Act and Environmental Remediation Claims

Extending Discretion: Balancing the Limitations Act and Environmental Remediation Claims

Russell J. Kruger

Research Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

Counsel

Separate corporate personality is not a loophole or technicality, but is an essential principle of corporate law, the Alberta Court of Appeal recently reiterated in <a rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://canlii.ca/t/jzbmj" target="_blank">Condominium Corporation No. 0828219 v Carrington Holdings Ltd., 2023 ABCA 222</a> [Carrington] and <a href="https://canlii.ca/t/jzf2t" target="_self">Swanby v Tru-Square Homes Ltd, 2023 ABCA 224</a> [Swanby]. Together, Carrington and Swanby highlight the powerful impact of separate corporate personality on shareholder liability for the actions of their corporations.

Separate Corporate Personality Remains Alive and Well in Alberta

Preet K. Gill

Insolvency & Restructuring Lawyer | Litigation & Transactions

Toronto Managing Partner

Legislation must show a clear, explicit and unequivocal intention to abrogate privilege before a party is required to disclose privileged information, the Ontario Court of Appeal reiterated in its recent decision of <a rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://canlii.ca/t/jwz8q" target="_blank">Ontario (Auditor General) v. Laurentian University, 2023 ONCA 299</a>.

Privilege is Sacrosanct Ontario Court of Appeal Affirms High Threshold for Abrogation of Privilege

Privilege is Sacrosanct: Ontario Court of Appeal Affirms High Threshold for Abrogation of Privilege

Suzie Suliman

Commercial Transactions Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Associate, Trademark Agent

Kees de Ridder

Technology, IP & Privacy Lawyer | Patents, Licensing & Cyber

Partner, Patent Agent, Trademark Agent

The Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada has released draft guidance outlining best practices for organizations to assess the privacy practices of third-party service providers under PIPEDA. The guidance emphasizes that privacy due diligence is an ongoing accountability obligation, with particular attention to data flows, AI and training data, security, subcontractors, international transfers and data retention.

OPC Issues New PIPEDA Guidance on Assessing Third-Party Service Providers

Ashley M. White

Corporate & Commercial Transactions Lawyer | Power & Energy

Partner

Martin Ignasiak KC

Energy & Industrial Projects Lawyer

Head of Energy Regulatory

Nathan Murray

Energy Regulatory, Environmental & Administrative Lawyer

Associate

Canada has amended the Physical Activities Regulations to remove certain intraprovincial energy projects and Canada Energy Regulator-regulated facilities from the federal Impact Assessment Act Project List. The changes are intended to reduce regulatory duplication, timelines and costs while providing greater certainty for proponents, while other federal environmental and emissions requirements remain applicable.

Government of Canada Reduces the Scope of the Project List under the Impact Assessment

Government of Canada Reduces the Scope of the Project List under the Impact Assessment Act

Jessica Kennedy

Regulatory Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

Jennifer (Jenn) K. Choi

Commercial Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Vancouver

On July 15, 2026, British Columbia and Simpcw First Nation entered into a consent-based decision-making agreement under the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act (DRIPA) for the environmental assessment of the Yellowhead Copper Project. The Agreement requires Simpcw consent for the project to proceed and establishes a framework for parallel provincial and Indigenous environmental assessments. Its potential application to future mining projects in Simpcw&rsquo;s traditional territory highlights the evolving role of Indigenous consent in major resource development projects in British Columbia.

BC Signs DRIPA Consent Agreement Requiring Simpcw Consent for Yellowhead Copper Project

BC Signs DRIPA Agreement Requiring Simpcw Consent for Yellowhead Copper Project

Katherine Booth

Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Vancouver

The BC Court of Appeal in Cleaver v. The Cadillac Fairview Corporation Limited upheld the refusal to certify a privacy class action, finding no basis in fact for the claim&rsquo;s central allegation. The decision reinforces the courts&rsquo; gatekeeping role at certification and the importance of evidentiary support for the core allegations underlying a proposed class proceeding.

BC Court of Appeal No basis in fact no class action

BC Court of Appeal: No Basis in Fact = No Class Action 

Michael C. Smith

Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

George W. H. Reid

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

The Government of Canada has published a new Notice concerning the rules and procedures governing the administration of the quota for imports of electric vehicles from the People's Republic of China for the second period of Quota Year 1 (September 1, 2026 to February 28, 2027). The Notice, issued by Global Affairs Canada under the Export and Import Permits Act, confirms that the second allocation period will continue to operate similar to the first allocation period.&nbsp;

Scott Bower in The Lawyers Weekly on Res Judicata

From the Same Authors