People

Services

Industries

Firm

About

Knowledge

Careers

News

Events

Contact

Connect

Privacy Policy

Disclaimer

Terms of Use

Accessibility

Legal

Calgary

Toronto

Edmonton

Ottawa

Vancouver

New York

Montréal

Kristopher R. Hanc

M&A and Capital Markets Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Partner

John Lawless

Private Equity, M&A, Corporate and Securities Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

James D. Beeby

Corporate Finance, M&A, Private Equity and Venture Capital Lawyer

The Supreme Court of Canada has released its much-anticipated decision in Lundin Mining Corp. v. Markowich, 2025 SCC 39, clarifying the definition of a "material change" under securities law and providing guidance on when a public company must disclose information to the market. The decision will have broad implications for public companies, their directors, officers, shareholders and other market participants.

Supreme Court of Canada Clarifies Scope of Securities Disclosure Obligations for Material Changes

Shifting Grounds: Supreme Court of Canada Clarifies Scope of Securities Disclosure Obligations for "Material Changes"

Robert W. Staley

Commercial, Securities and Class Action Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Vice Chair and Partner

Amanda C. McLachlan

Securities Litigation, Regulatory Investigations and Financial Crimes Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Doug Fenton

Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

The Ontario Court of Appeal&rsquo;s decision in Binance v. OSC clarifies the limits of the OSC&rsquo;s investigative powers and the Charter protections available in securities investigations. While the Court rejected a constitutional right to challenge a summons before compliance, it found the summons issued to Binance overbroad and unconstitutional. The ruling offers important guidance for market participants on regulatory scrutiny, the scope of document production, and the viability of judicial review.

Court of Appeal Addresses Scope of Charter Review in Securities Investigations

Binance v. OSC: Court of Appeal Addresses Scope of Charter Review in Securities Investigations 

David Cassin

Employment Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

In McPherson v Global Growth Assets Inc., the Ontario Superior Court interpreted the no-reprisal provisions of the Securities Act for the first time, awarding more than $5.3 million to a CEO who was terminated after raising compliance concerns. The decision underscores the strength of the Act&rsquo;s protections for employees who engage in protected activities and highlights the significant risk to employers of taking disciplinary action without clear, documented justification.

Ontario Securities Act No Reprisal Provisions Results in 53 Million Award to CEO

Ontario Securities Act No-Reprisal Provisions Results in C$5.3 Million Award to CEO: A Warning to Regulated Employers

Cheryl M. Woodin

Commercial Litigation, Product Liability & Class Actions Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Ciara J. Mackey

Commercial Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

In Sinclair v. Venezia Turismo, 2025 SCC 27, the Supreme Court of Canada clarified that jurisdiction must be assessed for each defendant individually. A plaintiff cannot rely on one defendant&rsquo;s contract or weak connecting factors to extend jurisdiction to others. The decision strengthens the principles of corporate separateness in cross-border disputes.

The SCC Clarifies Approach to Jurisdiction Against Multiple Defendants in Cross Border Disputes

Sinclair v. Venezia Turismo: The SCC Clarifies Approach to Jurisdiction Against Multiple Defendants in Cross-Border Disputes

Katherine Booth

Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Vancouver

Nina Butz

Associate

In RateMDs Inc. v. Bleuler, 2025 BCCA 329, the BC Court of Appeal overturned certification of a proposed privacy class action, finding that the plaintiff's novel claims that use of health professionals' names violated their privacy and amounted to commercial exploitation under provincial privacy statutes were bound to fail.

BC Court of Appeal dismisses proposed privacy class action

BC Court of Appeal Dismisses Proposed Privacy Class Action; Finds Use of Professionals' Names Was Not Commercial Exploitation 

William S. Osler KC

Capital Markets, Securities, M&A and Corporate Governance Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

Denise D. Bright

Public and Private Company Financial Transactions and Securities Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

Partner 

Olu Akinniyi

Articling Student

Recent amendments to Alberta&rsquo;s Securities Act strengthen the Alberta Securities Commission&rsquo;s ability to address financial misinformation and protect investors. Enacted through the Financial Statutes Amendment Act, 2025 (No. 2), the changes expand the definition of forward-looking information and grant the ASC new authority to temporarily halt trading where misleading or inaccurate information is being disseminated. While aimed at curbing harmful online promotion, including by &ldquo;finfluencers,&rdquo; the amendments also have important implications for reporting issuers and their disclosure practices.

Alberta Expands ASC Powers to Address Financial Misinformation

Laura James

Corporate Lawyer at Bennett Jones Vancouver

Rebecca Burnand

Corporate Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

Madison Sutherland

Newly released market data out of the US shows the demand for beauty products remained strong in 2025 despite pressure on overall consumer spending. Beauty M&amp;A deal volume in the US decreased slightly this year due to tariff and trade concerns, but analysts are optimistic for a busier 2026 on the dealmaking front.

Whats Shaping MA in the Beauty Industry

Glow and Grow: What's Shaping M&A in the Beauty Industry

Ethan Z. Schiff

Commercial Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Maisah Syed

In David v. Loblaw Companies Limited, the Ontario Court of Appeal confirms that a certification denial for failure to plead a cause of action is final and barred by res judicata. Absent narrow exceptions, plaintiffs cannot amend pleadings to relitigate certification and must pursue an appeal.

Ontario Court of Appeal Says that Plaintiffs Cannot Amend Instead of Appeal

Daron K. Naffin

Energy, Environmental/Regulatory and Expropriation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

Tim Myers

Regulatory, Environmental, Aboriginal and Expropriation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

Thomas Machell

Regulatory Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

The Alberta Energy Regulator has released new editions of Directive 071 and Manual 026, significantly expanding emergency preparedness and response requirements. This post outlines the key changes, including mandatory Emergency Management Programs, expanded scope across resource sectors, enhanced hazard analysis standards, and what approval holders should do ahead of the February 2, 2026 effective date.

Robert Staley, Derek Bell and Ranjan Agarwal in The Lawyers Weekly on LSUC Case

From the Same Authors