Articles 2019

A review by Matthew Gordon, a Toronto-based litigator with experience resolving civil, administrative, labour, employment and constitutional disputes and the sitting Chair of the Ontario Bar Association’s Alternative Dispute Resolution section, of Online Dispute Resolution by Colm Brannigan and Marc Bhalla.

Personal injury cases involving catastrophic injuries can be some of the most hotly-contested actions in this field of law. Significant amounts of money are often on the line. Since most civil cases settle before trial, a mediation session where the parties are brought together to negotiate with a neutral third party can be the pivotal moment in proceedings. In this article, I offer some thoughts on how to effectively mediate catastrophic injury cases.

In many negotiations, a client's reservation point becomes critical to understanding settlement options. A reservation point is the worst settlement a client will accept in order to avoid the worst alternative to a negotiated agreement. This situation applies to litigation, non-litigious disputes, and business negotiations, with slightly different dynamics in each.

Employment mediations have gone virtual. What does that mean for the parties, for counsel, for the mediator, and for the future of the profession? Here are 20 key points about where Zoom is taking the practice of employment mediation.

The ADR Section Executive is back for another great year of CPD, networking events, mentorship events, and arguing for increased use of ADR processes in the legal field.

International treaties commonly contain investment dispute resolution procedures. The International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) Rules are the most popular procedures chosen under these agreements. New amendments to these rules come into force on July 1, 2022, the first amendments since 2006. Key guidance regarding cost allocation, security for costs, and third-party funding are essential to arbitrators, counsel and parties embroiled in these critical disputes.

Ontario and BC courts have recently taken conflicting approaches to the standard of review of jurisdictional decisions in international commercial arbitration under the UNCITRAL Model Law. In this article, Chloe Snider and Karin Kazakevich explore this case law in detail, including the theoretical differences between the correctness standard and a hearing de novo.