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

Christine Plante

Employment Lawyer | HR Legal Counsel

Partner

Justin R. Lambert

Securities & Commercial Litigator | Fraud & Energy Disputes

Michael A. Eizenga L.S.M.

Leading Canadian Class Action Litigator

Partner 

Workplace class proceedings are on the rise in Canada. Recent class actions have involved employee claims for <a rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onca/doc/2022/2022onca115/2022onca115.html" target="_blank">overtime</a>, <a rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/2020/2020onsc5368/2020onsc5368.html" target="_blank">vacation time</a>, <a rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2021/2021bcsc2414/2021bcsc2414.html?searchUrlHash=AAAAAQAgImVzY29iYXIiIEFORCAiY2xhc3MgcHJvY2VlZGluZyIAAAAAAQ&resultIndex=1#_Toc89857824" target="_blank">damages for COVID-19 pandemic terminations</a>, <a rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2022/2022bcsc1608/2022bcsc1608.html?searchUrlHash=AAAAAQAgImVzY29iYXIiIEFORCAiY2xhc3MgcHJvY2VlZGluZyIAAAAAAQ&resultIndex=2#_Toc113546909" target="_blank">extended healthcare benefits</a>, <a rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/2021/2021onsc5518/2021onsc5518.html" target="_blank">misclassification of workers</a> and <a rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/fct/doc/2017/2017fc51/2017fc51.html?searchUrlHash=AAAAAQAKaGFyYXNzbWVudAAAAAAB&offset=0" target="_blank">systemic discrimination and harassment</a>. The Alberta Court of Appeal decision in <a rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.canlii.org/en/ab/abca/doc/2022/2022abca374/2022abca374.html?searchUrlHash=AAAAAQBTImNsYXNzIHByb2NlZWRpbmdzIiBPUiAiY2xhc3MgYWN0aW9uIiBPUiAiYWN0aW9uIGNvbGxlY3RpdmUiIE9SICJyZWNvdXJzIGNvbGxlY3RpZiIAAAAAAQ&resultIndex=3" target="_blank">Flesch v Apache Corporation, 2022 ABCA 374</a> now adds claims for long-term incentive compensation to this growing list. This decision also revisits the "gatekeeping" role the court has in certifying such class proceedings.

Tis the Reason ABCA Considers Expanding Gatekeeping Role of Courts

'Tis the Reason: ABCA Considers Expanding Gatekeeping Role of Courts in Certification of Workplace Class Proceeding

Martin Ignasiak KC

Energy & Industrial Projects Lawyer

Head of Energy Regulatory

A majority of the Supreme Court of Canada recently clarified that any public “advantage” that government obtains through land regulations that deprives a property owner of all reasonable or economic uses of their property is sufficient to establish a de facto expropriation claim. <a rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/19534/index.do" target="_blank">Annapolis Group Inc v. Halifax Regional Municipality</a>, 2022 SCC 36 is a welcome development for land and resource developers.

Government Advantage and Reasonable Land Use Supreme Court of Canada Clarifies Law

Government Advantage and Reasonable Land Use

Supreme Court of Canada Clarifies Law In de facto Expropriation Cases

Munaf Mohamed KC

Commercial Litigation & Economic Crimes Lawyer | Trials & Appeals

Michael D. Mysak KC

Corporate & Commercial Litigation Lawyer

In Henenghaixin Corp v Deng, 2022 ABCA 271, the Alberta Court of Appeal sent a clear warning that counsel applying for extraordinary remedies must be careful when relying on hearsay evidence to ground their claims. In this case, the applicants relied on hearsay evidence without explaining why they were required to do so. The result was that the order was set aside on appeal.

Is it Getting Harder to Get a Worldwide Freezing Injunction in Alberta

Is It Getting Harder to Get a Worldwide Freezing Injunction In Alberta?

Keely Cameron

Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

Belal Zaher

Commercial Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

Associate

In Perez-Nana v Cargill Limited, 2022 ABQB 283, the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench considered a sequencing application. Guided by efficiency and fairness, the Court refused to hear the motion to strike the claim or portions thereof prior to the certification application, and ordered the applications be heard concurrently.

Alberta Court Denies Application to Hear Motion to Strike Prior to Class Action

Alberta Court Denies Application to Hear Motion to Strike Prior to Class Action Certification Hearing

Akhila Sandhu

Summer Student

Morgan Sutherland

Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Associate 

Michael C. Smith

Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

The United Nations has adopted the first global regulatory framework for Automated Driving Systems, establishing safety, cybersecurity, testing and monitoring requirements for Level 3, 4 and 5 automated vehicles. This article examines the framework&rsquo;s implications for Canada, including how Transport Canada may incorporate the requirements into domestic vehicle safety standards and what manufacturers and suppliers should consider as regulation evolves.

First Global Regulatory Framework For Autonomous Vehicles

First Global Regulatory Framework For Autonomous Vehicles: Key Takeaways For Canada And The Auto Industry

Ethan Z. Schiff

Class Actions & Commercial Litigation Lawyer

The Supreme Court of Canada&rsquo;s decision in SS&amp;C Technologies Canada Corporation v. Bank of New York Mellon Corporation, 2026 SCC 29, revisits the doctrine of spoliation and confirms that courts must draw an adverse inference when intentional destruction of relevant evidence is established. The decision provides guidance on the test for spoliation, the scope of mandatory adverse inferences and the importance of preserving evidence during litigation.

The Supreme Court of Canada Affirms Mandatory Adverse Inference in Cases of Spoliation

The Supreme Court of Canada Affirms Mandatory Adverse Inference for Spoliation

Dominique T. Hussey

Chief Executive Officer and Intellectual Property Litigator, Pharma/Biotech and Trademark Lawyer

Chief Executive Officer

Vincent M. de Grandpré

IP Lawyer | Life Sciences & Tech

Emily P. Kettel

Intellectual Property Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Partner, Trademark Agent

In Pharmascience v. Janssen Inc., the Supreme Court of Canada reaffirmed that methods of medical treatment remain unpatentable subject matter under the Patent Act because they are directed to the professional skill and judgment of healthcare practitioners. At the same time, the Court upheld the patentability of the dosing regimen claims at issue, clarifying that not all therapeutic or treatment-related claims constitute unpatentable methods of medical treatment. The decision provides important guidance on assessing patent eligibility for pharmaceutical and life sciences innovations in Canada.

Supreme Court of Canada Reaffirms that  Methods of Medical Treatment are Unpatentable

Supreme Court of Canada Confirms That Medical Professional Skill and Judgment Are Excluded From the Patent Bargain

Evana Yukanna

Commercial Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Ontario court denies a late class action opt-out request, reinforcing settlement finality and confirming prejudice can arise before court approval.

Ontario Court Reinforces Finality of Class Proceedings in Rejecting Late Opt Out Request

Ontario Court Reinforces Finality of Class Proceedings in Rejecting Late Opt-Out Request

Tyler McDonough

Logan Lazurko

Energy & Regulatory Lawyer | Environmental

On June 17, 2026, the Alberta Court of Appeal unanimously dismissed an appeal by Fort McMurray 468 First Nation challenging an Alberta Energy Regulator decision that the First Nation lacked standing to request regulatory appeals of approvals issued to AdhMor Ltd. for an oilfield waste management facility near Fort McMurray. The decision in Fort McMurray 468 First Nation v Alberta Energy Regulator, 2026 ABCA 197, offers important guidance on what it takes to get in the door at the AER.

Alberta Court of Appeal Confirms Cumulative Effects are no Substitute for Evidence

No Standing Without Specifics: Alberta Court of Appeal Confirms that Cumulative Effects are no Substitute for Evidence

Title Alphabetical

Title

normal

Justin Lambert in Lawyer's Daily on Alberta Securities Commission Whistleblower Office

From the Same Authors