Osler Updates

564 Results | Viewing 11 to 20

Ontario Court Of Appeal Upholds Finding of Breach of Fiduciary Duty Respecting Executive Compensation

The Ontario Court of Appeal recently upheld a trial court decision which concluded that the CEO, who was also a director, breached his fiduciary duty to the corporation when the directors of Unique Broadband Systems, Inc. approved changes to a share appreciation rights plan and an extraordinary bonus.

Aug 20, 2014

Alberta Energy Regulator to Take Charge of Environmental Impact Assessments for Energy Resource Activities

Effective October 1, 2014, the Alberta Energy Regulator will assume responsibility for directing the Environmental Impact Assessment process for large energy projects such as oil sands mines, most oil sands processing plants and surface coal mines. This transfer of responsibility will allow the AER to govern the regulatory process for these projects from the initial environmental assessment phase through to project approval, closing what is viewed by some as a gap in Alberta’s “one window” approach to energy regulation.

Aug 20, 2014

Ontario Court Considers Content of Implied Duty of Good Faith in Business Negotiations

In SCM Insurance Services Inc. v. Medisys Corporate Health LP, Justice Wilton-Siegel found that, in the circumstances, a party was given the right of first negotiation and was therefore owed a duty to negotiate in good faith.

Aug 19, 2014

Supreme Court of Canada Limits the Right to Appeal Commercial Arbitral Decisions on Issues of Contractual Interpretation

In Sattva Capital Corp. v. Creston Moly Corp., 2014 SCC 53 (Sattva), released August 1, 2014, the Supreme Court of Canada overturned the historical approach and held that contractual interpretation involves questions of mixed fact and law rather than pure questions of law. As a result, leave to appeal from an arbitral award interpreting a contract should not have been granted. 

Aug 5, 2014

Debate Continues Regarding Proposed Cooperative Capital Markets Regulatory System

On July 9, 2014, on what Finance Minister Joe Oliver called “a landmark day” for reforming Canada’s capital markets regulatory regime, the federal government announced that Saskatchewan and New Brunswick had agreed to join Canada, British Columbia and Ontario in the Cooperative Capital Markets Regulatory System (CCMR).  

July 25, 2014

Land rulings a clear message to Ottawa, provinces: It’s time to govern

Thomas Isaac, Partner and practice lead for Osler’s Aboriginal Law Group, is a nationally recognized authority in the area of Aboriginal law. On Monday, July 21, 2014, The Globe and Mail published an online commentary written by Tom regarding two significant decisions by the Supreme Court of Canada on Aboriginal title and treaty rights.  

July 22, 2014

Provincial Jurisdiction Confirmed Regarding Treaty Rights – Supreme Court of Canada’s Keewatin Decision

In Grassy Narrows First Nation v Ontario (Natural Resources), also known as the Keewatin Decision, the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) confirmed that provinces have the power to take up treaty lands for resource development projects and other purposes consistent with provincial jurisdiction.

July 14, 2014

Target Benefit Plans in Canada – An Innovation Worth Expanding

Target Benefit Plans in Canada – An Innovation Worth Expanding – C.D. Howe Institute, Commentary No. 411

July 2014

Tsilhqot’in Decision: The Sky Is Not Falling

Despite the significant media attention that the recent Supreme Court of Canada decision in Tsilhqot’in Nation v. British Columbia (2014 SCC 44) has received, it represents a reiteration of established law regarding Aboriginal title that has been developed over decades.  The decision is historic because it is the first time that any court has formally declared that Aboriginal title exists, albeit under an existing legal framework.

June 27, 2014

U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Fraud-on-the-Market Doctrine

In its highly anticipated decision in Halliburton Co. v. Erica P. John Fund, Inc. released this week, the U.S. Supreme Court confirmed that plaintiffs in securities class actions could continue to rely on the “fraud-on-the-market” presumption. Where available, the presumption eliminates the need for plaintiffs to demonstrate reliance on an alleged misrepresentation on an individual basis.

June 25, 2014