Articles 2020

In a global mediation of an insurance claim, there are often three different insurers: tort, accident benefits, and long-term disability. Each may bring a different perspective to the table, as well as a different timeline and different underlying interests. In this article, experienced insurance mediator Joseph Sullivan explains some of the main issues that arise in these global settlement scenarios.

Phase Two of Ontario’s On-Site and Excess Soil Management Regulation took effect on January 1, 2022. Since coming into force on January 1, 2021, the Regulation has introduced a new framework for the excavation, removal and transport of “excess soil” between two or more sites. These regulatory changes have affected property owners, developers, consultants, and the construction industry as a whole, exposing its participants to new risks and legal requirements.

How has impact assessment (IA) and environmental assessment (EA) legislation evolved over the past fifty years in Canada? How will recent IA/EA amendments and modernization schemes impact environmental protection, meaningful Indigenous consultation, socio-economic benefits, and post-approval processes? The Ontario Bar Association’s “Environmental Assessment Primer” provided valuable insight into these questions as well as a comprehensive overview of the practice of environmental assessment law. 

As part of the 2022 OBA Institute conference on February 3rd, 2022, the speakers presented a non-exhaustive list of top ten cases from 2021 based on their relevance to the wide membership of the OBA Environmental Law Section. The selected cases are summarized below and are grouped in themes.

In Bourque v. Insight Productions Ltd. et al (“Bourque”) , the Ontario Superior Court of Justice had its first occasion to dismiss an action for delay pursuant to the new s. 29.1. Although he dismissed the action, Justice Belobaba said it could be refiled against the same defendants but with a different proposed representative plaintiff. The basis for this determination and whether it represents obiter comments is unclear.

Recent changes to the Endangered Species Act, 2007 (“ESA”) include allowing payment of species conservation charges to a Species at Risk Conservation Fund and streamlining conditional exemptions for activities impacting prescribed species at risk. One significant change is the introduction of a new option allowing proponents undertaking authorized activities to contribute to the Species at Risk Conservation Fund instead of completing beneficial actions for species impacted by their activities.

In Baroch v Canada, Justice Belobaba noted that it was “self-evident… that third-party funding should be a relevant factor in the ‘risks incurred’ analysis” but that “it may be unfair to impose this new risk metric retroactively on a class action that was undoubtedly commenced under a very different expectation.

This article summarizes a recent court of appeal decision where the court ruled that a municipality's undertaking to process a zoning application for the developer does not include protecting the developer's economic interests. In other words, the municipality is not liable for damages the developer incurs due to the municipality's provision of inaccurate information when processing the zoning application.