Current Issue

cover image
August, 2017
  • Divisional Court provides guidance on leave costs

    The Divisional Court has shed some light on how costs will be awarded on motions for leave to appeal under its new process. The court implemented a number of changes at the beginning of July, including that it no longer requires judges to provide reasons whenever leave to appeal is granted. This has led to some discussion among lawyers as to how the court was going to deal with costs on motions for leave to appeal.
  • Taking questions under advisement must stop

    A Tax Court of Canada judge has issued a strong rejection of taking questions “under advisement” in examinations for discovery. In Burlington Resources Finance Co. v. the Queen, Justice Johanne D’Auray ordered the applicant to re-attend an examination for discovery to answer certain questions they had refused to answer or only provided part answers for.
  • Lawyers blast suspensions as unfair

    If the Ontario Divisional Court sides with the Law Society of Upper Canada in an upcoming application on a disclosure matter, lawyers say it could make it harder to defend interlocutory suspensions.


  • Gabrielle Giroday

    Editorial Obiter

    Editorial: Suspension tension

    Issues around lawyer discipline frequently garner headlines. In this issue, Law Times has its third piece in a four-part series examining lawyer discipline. The series has illuminated the skyrocketing number of interlocutory suspensions sought by the Law Society of Upper Canada since 2012.
  • n/a

    Speaker's Corner: Bill 101 has major shortcomings

    Earlier this year, a private member’s bill was introduced in the Legislative Assembly of Ontario for the purpose of amending the province’s Business Corporations Act. The apparent aim of bill 101, Enhancing Shareholders Rights Act, 2017 is to provide shareholders with greater opportunities for engagement and control within the corporate apparatus and to “modernize” Ontario’s corporate legislation.

Focus On

  • Human rights check needed for pension plans

    Female former Mounties bring action over benefits. Pension plan sponsors need to work a human rights check into their compliance reviews, says a Toronto lawyer.
  • Pension sponsors hopeful about new funding framework

    Change anticipated to make plans more affordable. Pension sponsors are cautiously optimistic about Ontario’s new funding framework for defined-benefit plans, according to lawyers in the field.
  • Gaping hole in personal pensions marketplace

    ‘Most lawyers don’t have pension plans’. Jean-Pierre Laporte had barely thought about a pension — either his own or anyone else’s — by the time he was called to the bar at the turn of the century.
  • Ruling on CPP a win for accident victims

    A Supreme Court of Canada decision that ruled the Canada Pension Plan is not a policy of insurance is a win for accident victims across the country, says a Toronto lawyer.

Inside Story


  • Aug 21, 2017

    Editorial Cartoon: August 21, 2017


Click here to view past digital editions.

Law Times Poll

A group of benchers opposed to the Statement of Principles will need to win the support of their colleagues to repeal the requirement. Do you think they will be successful in repealing the statement of principles in the coming year?