On April 3, 2020, the Ontario government ordered that further non-essential businesses must close by April 4, 2020 at 11:59 p.m. including closing down most construction sites in order to flatten the curve of the COVID-19 pandemic. The number of essential businesses was reduced from 74 to 44. The revised list of essential businesses can be found here. Construction sites related to the healthcare sector, provincial infrastructure such as transit, and projects related to the production of ventilators and other products directly related to fighting COVID-19 were permitted to remain open. Residential construction sites were permitted to remain open where: (i) a footing permit has been granted for single family, semi-detached and townhouses; (ii) an above grade structural permit has been granted for condominiums; or (iii) the work was related to renovations and started before April 4, 2020. Given the expansive definition of essential residential construction sites, it appears that … Read More
The Impact of Covid-19 / Coronavirus On Franchise Disclosure Obligations
The Covid-19 / Coronavirus pandemic has disrupted social and economic life globally and here in Ontario. It is apparent that the Covid-19 pandemic, resulting closures and physical distancing measures implemented by various governments will have a considerable impact on investment decisions in the franchise context. In this blog we consider the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on current and shortly anticipated franchise disclosure obligations. The Crucial Role Of Franchise Disclosure The franchise disclosure obligations which arise during a franchise purchase or franchise renewal process are critical for both franchisees and franchisors. It provides crucial information to a franchisee so that they can make a fully informed investment decision, and sets the groundwork and expectations on behalf of the franchisor to ensure the relationship is off to a good start and lasts to the mutual benefit of both parties. Updating Franchise Disclosure With Covid-19 / Coronavirus Impact Considerations Franchisors who are … Read More
Remote Arbitration Hearings | Remote Court Hearings – Emerging Protocols for COVID-19 / Coronavirus
“It is the duty of all the parties to seek to co-operate to ensure that a remote hearing is possible.” ~ Justice Teare (Commercial Court, a Queen’s Bench Division of the High Court of Justice, England and Wales) Protocols on the use of video conferencing in arbitration and court hearings are emerging: Remote Arbitration Hearings The Seoul Protocol on Video Conferencing in International Arbitration was drafted and discussed by a panel of arbitration practitioners in 2018, consisting of Kap-You (Kevin) Kim as moderator (Partner, Peter & Kim), Yu-Jin Tay (Partner, Mayer Brown), Ing Loong Yang (Partner, Latham & Watkins LLP) and SeungMin Lee (Partner, Shin & Kim), and has been revised to reflect comments from the Seoul International Dispute Resolution Center (released March 18, 2020). Remote Court Hearings The Ontario Superior Court of Justice Practice Directions and Notices regarding COVID-19 (updated March 31, 2020) has published the Notice Regarding Videoconference … Read More
Divorce and Separation: Who gets the family pet?
Upon separation or divorce, a contentious issue is often which party gets to keep the family pet. Despite furry friends often being just as important to the family as children, Ontario’s courts have refused to make custody orders in respect of family pets. Justice Timms in Warnica v Gering stated “Whether in the Family Court or otherwise, I do not believe that any court should be in the business of making custody orders for pets, disguised or otherwise… Obviously, I acknowledge that pets are of great importance to human beings. Strong bonds develop between them and the human beings that look after them. To some people, the relationship with their pets takes on a significance exceeding that of any other. They go to extraordinary lengths to preserve that relationship; even at a cost that some would say is disproportionate. Some may consider them to be children; however, they are not children.” … Read More
COVID-19 / Coronavirus: How to Schedule an Urgent Civil or Commercial List Hearing
On March 15, 2020, the Chief Justice of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice released a Notice to the Profession advising that all scheduled civil hearings were adjourned until further notice. The Notice to the Profession provides a procedure to schedule urgent and time-sensitive motions and applications where immediate and significant financial repercussions may result without a hearing. When motion or application materials are filed, by email to the appropriate courthouse, seeking an urgent hearing, the triage judge will determine whether or not the matter is urgent and should be scheduled for a hearing. There have been a few recent endorsements reported in respect to the scheduling of urgent commercial lease matters. Urgent Motion – Relief From Forfeiture In Oppong v. Desoro Holdings Inc., 2020 ONSC 1697, the applicant sought relief from forfeiture to set aside the landlord’s termination of the lease. Although the application was brought promptly and scheduled to be … Read More
Arbitration & Court Closure Due to COVID-19 / Coronavirus
Litigants and lawyers requiring timely resolution of disputes and who have no or limited access to the courts for trials or other hearings because of COVID-19 / Coronavirus related court closures, or for whom a public court-centered proceeding is inappropriate, may wish to consider arbitration as an alternative to litigation. In-person, video or teleconferencing determinations of arbitrated disputes at reasonable rates can resolve procedural and substantive issues more quickly than our courts in the current COVID-19 / Coronavirus related crisis, and very often in ordinary circumstances where congested dockets unfortunately preclude expedited case determinations. With the consent of the parties to litigation, and at virtually any stage of the litigation, an ad hoc arbitration can be arranged. Arbitration may be the forum best suited to the resolution of your dispute across a broad range of practice areas. Please see the Gilbertson Davis LLP Arbitration & Mediation Chambers webpage, and other … Read More
Contract Arbitrator – Event Cancellation Dispute Arbitrator, Force Majeure Clause Dispute – Reasonable Fees and Good Availability – Gilbertson Davis LLP Arbitration and Mediation Chambers
Contract Dispute Arbitrator Sole Arbitrator – $450.00 per hour, plus HST An arbitrator, or an arbitration tribunal, obtains jurisdiction to adjudicate and decide a dispute from an agreement / contract which has been made by the parties to the arbitration. This jurisdiction is not typically provided by legislation, though there are exceptions, such as the arbitration provision deemed by statute to be included in a condominium declaration. Even if there is no arbitration clause in the contract or agreement made by the parties and a dispute arises, then parties to that contract may still agree to have their dispute determined by arbitration. The parties to a contract may prefer to have a dispute determined by arbitration, since it is presumptively a confidential process, it may be faster and less expensive than going to court, or they may wish to participate in the selection of the adjudicator. Common Contractual Issues Arbitrated … Read More
Measures of Last Resort – The Benefits of Exit Provisions in Shareholder’s Agreements
The benefits of a shareholder’s agreement may not be fully considered when parties are intending to go into business together and become joint shareholders in a corporation. Perhaps the mood is optimistic and none of the participants anticipate that things might sour between them down the road. Sometimes corporations are formed absent such an agreement. However, among other benefits, these agreements become particularly useful in managing risk and guiding shareholders through governance issues and disputes that may arise, efficiently so as to minimize disruption to the corporation’s business. Absent a shareholder’s agreement, shareholders in a closely held corporation that cannot see eye-to-eye regarding the operation and path of the corporation, may become stuck in a deadlock where decision-making is effectively stifled due to a stalemate between them. Shareholder’s agreements can serve to provide mechanisms to address deadlock, protect the voice and rights of minority shareholders, provide a road map for … Read More
When Shareholders Need an Auditor or Inspector
I address here in a general way the procedures available for a shareholder or group of shareholders seeking the assistance of the court to have an auditor or inspector appointed. Financial Statements – None or Inaccurate Shareholders in closely-held Ontario corporations sometimes have concerns about the accuracy of the financial statements when the company does not have an auditor. Oppressive or Unfairly Prejudicial Conduct In other cases, a shareholder in an Ontario corporation may consider that the corporation has been carried on, or the powers of the directors are, or have been, exercised, in a manner that is oppressive or unfairly prejudicial to, or that unfairly disregards, the interests of the shareholder. Corporation and Fraud One or more shareholders may have concerns that the corporation’s business is, or has been, carried on with the intent to defraud, that the corporation was formed or dissolved for a fraudulent or unlawful purpose, … Read More
Hurdles To Recognition and Enforcement Of Foreign Judgments
In the recent Ontario Court of Appeal decision of H.M.B. Holdings Limited v. Antigua and Barbuda, 2020 ONCA 12, the Court of Appeal rendered a split (2-1) decision regarding the recognition of a foreign judgment which muddies the waters on the analysis to be applied to s.3(b) of the Reciprocal Enforcement of Judgments Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. R.5 (REJA) Original Judgment: In this case H.M.B. Holdings Limited (HMB) was successful in obtaining judgment on February 26, 2014, against Antigua and Barbuda from the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (the JCPC), which is the highest court of appeal for certain British territories and Commonwealth countries including Antigua and Barbuda. The case related to damages sought by HMB due to the expropriation of resort lands by the Antiguan government. The case has garnered some media attention because of the manner in which the lands were expropriated. HMB then brought a common law … Read More
Judgment Against Anonymous Blogger – Service on Pseudonym
In the recent decision of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Theralase Technologies Inc. v. Lanter, 2020 ONSC 205, (“Theralase Technologies Inc.”) the court granted judgment in libel against anonymous and unidentified bloggers. In his reasons, Justice Myers held that the court has jurisdiction to grant judgment against unidentified defendants, despite the fact that the plaintiffs and the court do not know the defendant’s name, for defamatory statements published on the internet, “where a form of service can reasonably be expected to bring court proceedings to the attention of an unidentified defendant at whom the litigation finger has been appropriately pointed…” While noting that nothing in the Rules of Civil Procedure anticipates final judgments being granted against unidentified defendants, because civil proceedings generally involve claims and judgments in personam (against a person), the court observed that there are many cases started with placeholder names like “John Doe” pending the identification of … Read More
Profit Not Required to Find Use of Trademark in Normal Course of Trade
The Federal Court of Appeal in Cosmetic Warriors Limited v. Riches, McKenzie & Herbert LLP, 2019 FCA 48, set aside the decision and allowed the appeal of the Federal Court judgment allowing an appeal from a decision of the Registrar of Trade-marks, made through her delegate, a hearing officer of the Trade-marks Opposition Board, that found that the trademark had been used in the “normal course of trade” within the meaning of subsection 4(1) of the Trademarks Act, RSC 1985, c T-13 ( the “Act”) and thus maintained the registration of a trade-mark in a proceeding challenging the registration for non-use under section 45 of the Act. In issue was the trade-mark “LUSH,” as registered for use in association with “[c]lothing, namely, t-shirts.” In its decision, the Federal Court of Appeal described that: “The T-shirts and tank tops bearing the LUSH trade-mark are sold by Lush Canada in limited quantities … Read More
Liability of Directors and Officers | Oppression Remedy | Shareholders Claims
The lawyers in our Business Dispute Practice Group have acted in Ontario and other jurisdictions for small, mid-sized and large corporations (incorporated in Ontario and in Canada), shareholders, directors, officers, and executives in corporate disputes and shareholder disputes. We have acted for clients in both oppression remedy action and derivative actions. Oppression Remedy The oppression remedy is a mechanism in the Ontario Business Corporations Act and the Canada Business Corporations Act to protect the interests of shareholders and stakeholders in a corporation against wrongful conduct. Whether the Ontario or Canada Act will apply depends on the jurisdiction in which the corporation was incorporated. The oppression remedy can be used to protect the interests of shareholders, directors, officers or creditors against the acts of other shareholders, the board of directors or other affiliates of the corporation. The oppression remedy can be used to protect the interests of shareholders, directors, officers or creditors against the … Read More
UN Convention on Contracts for International Sale of Goods | Ontario’s International Sales Convention Act
Some international traders are still not aware that the UN Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods is the law of Ontario, Canada, by virtue of the Ontario International Sales Conventions Act, RSO 1990, c I.10. The Convention Status Chart is located here. Pending entry of the United Nations Convention On Contracts for the International Sale of Goods into force in these jurisdictions should be noted*: DPR Korea on 01.04.2020 Guatemala on 01.01.2021 Lao PDR on 01.10.2020 Liechtenstein on 01.05.2020 *Authoritative information on the status of the treaties deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations, including historical status information, may be obtained by consulting the United Nations Treaty Collection. The UNCITRAL Secretariat also prepares yearly a document containing the Status of Conventions and Enactments of UNCITRAL Model Laws, which is available on the web page of the corresponding UNCITRAL Commission Session. Please read our archive of blog … Read More
Toronto Cannabis Retail Franchise Arbitrator with Reasonable Fee Rate
David is a Qualified Arbitrator (Q.Arb) who has been appointed sole arbitrator in commercial disputes by the Ontario Superior Court of Justice. He is a full member of the ADR Institute of Ontario and the Toronto Commercial Arbitration Society and appears on each of their rosters of arbitrators. He accepts appointment as arbitrator in Cannabis Retail franchise, distribution and licensing disputes. (click here) Sole Arbitrator – $450.00 per hour, plus HST David accepts appointment as sole or panel arbitrator in cannabis retain franchise, distribution, and licencing disputes (click here), whether domestic or international international dimension. As legal counsel, David has extensive experience in distribution disputes. David has practiced franchise law in Ontario, in connection with franchisors located in Ontario and the U.S. His experience in franchise law includes representation in proceedings (and potential proceedings) concerning rescission and damages claims, counterclaims of franchisors, termination of franchise agreements, opinions on the application … Read More
Keep Them Calm and Arbitrate On!
Keep Them Calm and Arbitrate On! David Alderson, LL.B, LL.M (Commercial and Corporate), Q.Arb, Lawyer and Arbitrator, will present a talk and workshop at the ADR Institute of Ontario 2020, 35th Annual General Meeting and Professional Development Conference, on June 4, 2020, entitled “Keep Them Calm and Arbitrate On: Sources of Commercial Arbitration Conflict & Tools / Techniques for Conflict Minimization“. Workshop Description Conflict in arbitration arises when the process is conducted as a fight, a battle, or a struggle. This can defeat the process and frustrate realization of the parties’ objectives. This talk will focus on four sources of conflict: the party who 1) does not want to be in arbitration, but who has no choice because of a contractual or statutory arbitration requirement; 2) refuses to participate in the process (and/or to pay the tribunal’s fees); 3) fights everything: the rules, the laws, jurisdiction and procedural orders; and 4) participates over-zealously, whether personally or through counsel. Strategies to minimize such conflicts are suggested. Background David Alderson has accredited … Read More
Part Two – Timing is Everything in Real Estate Agreements of Purchase and Sale
I had written a previous blog on the “time is of the essence” clause in real estate agreements where it was discussed that the strict adherence to any agreed upon time limits was generally the case. A recent Ontario Court of Appeal case, Fortress Carlyle Peter St. Inc. v. Ricki’s Construction and Painting Inc., serves as a reminder that the “time is of the essence” clause is not absolute and unfettered, and there are preconditions that must be satisfied for a party to rely upon and insist on time being of the essence. The facts are not overly complicated in this case. The respondent was a condominium developer in the process of acquiring properties for a proposed project in downtown Toronto. The developer entered into an Agreement of Purchase and Sale (“APS”) with the vendor to acquire the subject property. Although the APS required the vendor to provide estoppel certificates five days prior … Read More