Articles

On February 21, the executive members of the Young Lawyers Division East Section traded in their business attire for aprons and hairnets to serve food at The Ottawa Mission as part of Lawyers Feed the Hungry. During this event, hot meals were served to more than 400 individuals over the course of just two hours. With dinnertime done and the tables cleared, I had two lingering questions in my mind: 1) why was that so rewarding, and 2) when could I do it again?

Suppose you own a house and want to open a restaurant on the ground floor. The applicable zoning by-law happens to permit that use on your property so you pull a building permit for the renovations, get a liquor license and start cookin’ with [TSSA-approved] gas. A week later, the City, in its wisdom, amends the zoning by-law to prohibit restaurant uses at your property. What do you do now?

This article is a summary of a paper entitled “Ethics and the In-House Counsel: Going Beyond the Normal in Combating Labour Abuses”, which was first presented at Canadian Corporate Counsel Association’s National Conference in Toronto, Ontario in April-May 2018.

The concept and role of section 3 counsel is inherently tricky, because counsel is, on one hand, tasked to represent individuals whose capacity is in issue, yet the lawyer is still bound by the Rules of Professional Conduct and Rules of Civil Procedure and duty-bound not to take or act on instruction if the client is found to lack the capacity to instruct.

On February 20, 2019, the Ministry of Government and Consumer Services announced that the Progressive Conservative government of Ontario intends to revive the previous government’s efforts to transform Tarion Warranty Corporation, and will also be implementing initiatives to better protect purchasers of cancelled pre-construction condominium projects.

Glenda Mallon, Ryerson University’s interim assistant VP, shares her thoughts on shifting roles from in-house counsel to business leader

Employers take note: the Court of Appeal recognizes advance notice of termination in mass terminations and invalidates notice period due to excessive overtime and temporary work

The concept of the “franchisor’s associate” is one of the vaguest concepts under Ontario franchise legislation and one of the most perilous for individuals offering franchises.

There were five substantive civil decisions released by the Court of Appeal for Ontario this week. In two of them, the Court continued to provide guidance on the “valid defence” analysis to be undertaken pursuant to the Anti-SLAPP provisions of section 137.1 of the Courts of Justice Act.