While cottages might be idyllic getaways for many Canadians, an owner should keep in mind that they owe a duty of care by law to take the precautions necessary to ensure that anyone visiting their summer residence is reasonably safe while there, says Toronto lawyer Nada Nicola-Howorth.

Lawyer Kirk Boggs, who acted for the Ottawa police, said allowing the suit to proceed could have unfairly damaged the reputations of those involved in the prosecution.

"Sometimes the court system has to say enough: If we attempt to go further, we may do more harm than good," Boggs said in a statement Wednesday.

Sometimes the court system has to say enough - if we attempt to go further, we may do more harm than good," says Kirk Boggs, a lawyer with Lerners LLP, who along with Jasmine Akbarali of Lerners, argued the case on behalf of the Ottawa Police Services Board and the retired police officers.

It is not surprising that there were fewer securities class actions filed in Canada in 2012, says Toronto litigator Brian Radnoff.

“The greatest cause of the decrease is the fact that markets were generally stable, if not good, in Canada in 2012,” says Radnoff. “The greatest driver of securities class actions are poor markets, particularly after market bubbles, when equities can fall considerably.

The long-awaited civil trial in Livent Inc. (Special Receiver) v. Deloitte & Touche could be precedent-setting if the powerful “equal fault” defence ends up being material to the outcome, says Toronto commercial litigation lawyer Bill Pepall.

Arbitration legislation is on its way to being streamlined in Canada – an onerous but necessary task to develop much-needed uniformity, says Toronto lawyer and arbitrator Earl Cherniak.

This decision means that issuers can settle with class counsel in different jurisdictions separately if they feel they need to, reducing the risk that class members in one country might 'hold out'.

“Year over year, our guests tell us how much they appreciate the atmosphere of our Extraordinary Women’s Extravaganza, so we work hard to keep it primarily social and informal,” says Lisa Munro, co-managing partner of Lerners’ Toronto office.

There are two recent trends that impact the appointment and independence of arbitrators.

The first involves attacks on awards by unsuccessful parties.

Two recent trends emerging in the world of alternative dispute resolution impact both the appointment and independence of arbitrators, Toronto lawyer Earl Cherniak, who specializes in ADR, writes in Lawyers Weekly.

There is a sales pitch for arbitration. Earl Cherniak, a lawyer with Lerners LLP who now spends about 80% of his time serving as an arbitrator, says they aren’t always cheaper than standard courtroom litigation.

Lucas Lung, a lawyer with Lerners LLP in Toronto who acted for the Canadian Jewish Congress, an intevenor in the case, said he was still studying the ruling but praised it for upholding the existing definition of hate. He said the discussion of free speech around the case threatened to overshadow the effect of Mr. Whatcott’s speech on equality rights: “We can’t lose sight of the fact that there are victims here whose equality rights have been infringed.”

At least two groups that intervened in the case expressed hope that the decision will help to clarify the hate speech laws.

"It reaffirms the case law as we have understood it for the last 25 years," said Mark Freiman of the Canadian Jewish Congress.

Lucas Lung, a partner at Lerners LLP, says an important point of the ruling is even though freedom of expression was the focal point, we shouldn’t lose sight of the fact that there is an important equality right being protected here.

He references a paragraph from the ruling, which states: “In my view, the criticisms point to two conceptual challenges to achieving a consistent application of a prohibition against hate speech. One is how to deal with the inherent subjectivity of the concept of ‘hatred.’ Another is a mistaken propensity to focus on the ideas being expressed, rather than on the effect of the expression.”

At least two groups that intervened in the case expressed hope that the decision will help to clarify the hate speech laws.

“It reaffirms the case law as we have understood it for the last 25 years,” said Mark Freiman of the Canadian Jewish Congress.

“It reaffirms that there is a very high standard in order for communication to qualify as hatred.”

Mark Freiman, a former deputy Attorney-General of Ontario who argued at the Supreme Court on behalf of the Canadian Jewish Congress, said the ruling was a “reaffirmation” of principles first articulated by the Supreme Court 20 years ago, in the case of hate hotline operator John Ross Taylor.

Those principles — that it is constitutionally valid to limit a fundamental right, in this case limiting speech that exposes people to hatred based on their membership in a group — were often lost in the rancorous debate over hate speech law, he said.

At least two groups that intervened in the case expressed hope that the decision will help to clarify Canada's hate speech laws.

"It reaffirms the case law as we have understood it for the last 25 years," said Mark Freiman of the Canadian Jewish Congress.

"It reaffirms that there is a very high standard in order for communication to qualify as hatred."

“I think Bay St. will be happy with this decision. Main St. may have some issues with this,” said Domenico Magisano, a partner at Lerners who specializes in corporate restructuring and insolvency.

“It will certainly be good for companies that are seeking to restructure and continue as going-concerns, but I can certainly see why Indalex pensioners will not see this this as a good decision,” Magisano said.

"Bay Street will be happy. Main Street may not be," said Domenico Magisano, a partner in the Toronto office of Lerners LLP. "While there's short-term pain for these pensioners, the ability to restructure companies will continue as it was before."

“Bay Street will be happy. Main Street may not be,” said Domenico Magisano, a partner in the Toronto office of Lerners LLP. “While there’s short-term pain for these pensioners, the ability to restructure companies will continue as it was before.”

But a year later, the Ontario Divisional Court completed a judicial review and overturned the tribunal’s decision, concluding the tribunal did not consider all evidence available.

The debate was on again in late December after Nobles and Pieters took their case against Firth and the Peel Law Association to the appeal court. Their case is largely based on circumstantial evidence, including the way the men were approached.

She could have also headed towards them because she was told people had been inappropriately moving the furniture around in the lounge earlier where the three men were sitting, said Mark Freiman, the respondents’ counsel.

“The fact that people in society are discriminatory cannot be used as evidence that a particular [person] was discriminatory,” argued Freiman.

In the past, litigating a class action has been much more of an academic enterprise that has involved highly technical arguments before motions judges and appellate courts. The shift to trial will bring a change in tactics, observes Jason Squire, a partner in the Toronto office of Lerners LLP. “Because we act on both sides of these types of cases, our advice is that you pick your trial counsel early. Certification is a set of issues you’re going to have to work through, to be sure. But determinations on their merits are a reality. You have to pick the lawyers that you want to act for you at trial.”

A Windsor woman whose father died from choking on his food just days after moving into a long-term care home has launched a $6-million lawsuit alleging wrongful death and a cover-up by the home’s staff.

“The ministry order doesn’t go far enough,” Joseph’s lawyer Maia Bent told The Star. “In our opinion, this is not adequate. It minimizes it, which is offensive, really, when you’re dealing with a wrongful death.”

Defence lawyer Earl Cherniak told the disciplinary panel a suspension is unnecessary, given Groia has been “living with this cloud over his head for the last 11.5 years,” spending weeks away from his practice to mount his defence and incurring legal bills.

“Mr. Groia’s positions are irrelevant to the penalty at all,” Mr. Cherniak told the panel. “... He’s entitled to his views like any citizen.”

In addition, the proposed focus on mental-health treatment would tread on other provinces’ jurisdiction and the scope of the inquest, she said, would go beyond the purpose of Ontario’s Coroner’s Act.

Mark Freiman on behalf of three Ontario doctors who treated Smith raised similar constitutional concerns.

Dogged by increasingly negative media coverage over the handling of investigations into the suicide of Afghanistan war veteran Stuart Langridge the Department of National Defence edited an internal police force report before releasing it publicly and to the soldier’s family, a federal inquiry heard Friday.

The revelation at the Military Police Complaints Commission inquiry was one of several indications that the independence of the National Investigation Service (NIS), the military’s detective agency, was compromised after Langridge’s parents went public with their grievances.

The military interfered with the report “while preparing it for publication” in a pre-emptive effort to avoid a “sensational fact” getting to the media, said Commission lawyer Mark Freiman.

The Military Police Complaints Commission probe into the suicide of Afghanistan veteran Stuart Langridge also heard that the stunning revelation that his last wishes had been hidden from his family resulted in hastily prepared media lines that contained misleading and erroneous information.

“Is it fair to say there was a fair amount of confusion at this point about who said what to whom?” commission lawyer Mark Freiman asked Maj. Daniel Dandurand, a key witness at the inquiry.

Jason Squire, a partner at Lerners LLP, says he has seen Brown take a similar hands-on approach with one of his matters on the commercial list and is interested to see how many judges will follow his lead.

The SWIM fundraiser is SMART, which in this case means Strong Mothers Achieving Remarkable Triumph. SMART is a scholarship, four in fact, which will see $2,000 distributed among four recipients. The fundraiser takes place Sept. 28 at the London Hilton.

Sandra Drozd, a lawyer from Lerners Law Firm, and a single mother, will be speaking on education and career.

“One presumes the Supreme Court is going to determine the question once and for all whether indirect purchasers can sue,” says Brian Radnoff, a litigation and competition lawyer at Lerners LLP.

“It’s a very important issue. These class actions often arise from conspiracies or cartels where a bunch of suppliers get together and restrict output or price competition. It’s very detrimental to consumers and bad for the economy.”

Superiors of the lead military investigator in the Stuart Langridge suicide case slashed and censored their subordinate’s final summary of the case, a shocked federal inquiry heard Thursday.

Military Police Complaints Commission lawyer Mark Freiman dropped the bombshell towards the end of a day of dramatic testimony by Sgt. Matthew Ritco, the investigator chosen to handle the Langridge case the day the Afghanistan war veteran hanged himself in March 2008.

Uniqueness of claims and different histories likely mean it will be an uphill battle for more than 200 potential plaintiffs to have their gender discrimination lawsuit against the RCMP certified as a class action, says Toronto litigation and class action lawyer Brian Radnoff.

What’s often left out of that discussion is how law firms and in-house counsel work, over time, to iron out bumps in the road and change up what works for them and their respective business units as the relationship evolves. When it works well, the law firm and in-house counsel develop critical points of contact.

Case in point is the Telus Communications Co. litigation department and its outside firm in Ontario, Lerners LLP. Associate general counsel Alan Dabb has been working with the Lerners team since he joined Telus in 2007. Since then he has come to know many of the lawyers at the firm. While it is one of about half a dozen firms Dabb deals with across the country, Lerners manages files in Ontario ranging from small claims items up to the most significant currently active litigation files.

...

“It’s great that the relationship can evolve — you’re not stuck in a static relationship,” says Dabb. “There are going to be challenges and it’s how you deal with those challenges and strengthen the relationship that matters.”

Toronto appellate lawyer Brian Radnoff says it is “somewhat surprising” that the SCC has decided to hear two civil fraud appeals which were part of an omnibus ruling that put forward a new approach on summary judgment only pertaining to Ontario.

Landowners should be aware that there is a new cost associated with billboard signs.

"I would have to sell my house. I would have no quality of life," Phillips said of not having benefits won from the insurer by his London lawyer Andrew Murray, a partner at Lerners.

If the changes are adopted, those needing long-term rehabilitation will have a tough time making insurers pay — and taxpayers may have to foot the bill, said lawyer Andrew Murray, a partner at Lerners in London and the new president of the Ontario Trial Lawyers Association, which is leading the fight against the proposed changes

His lawyer, Earl Cherniak, said Mr. Groia was “very disappointed” and is considering an appeal of the decision.

Groia is “very disappointed” with the decision, his lawyer, Earl Cherniak, said in an emailed statement.

Asked by Military Police Complaints Commission lawyer Mark Freiman whether he agreed with Shaun Fynes’s characterization that withholding the note was “cruel, callous and disrespectful”, Hammond said most people in the Canadian Forces would agree.

Commission lead lawyer Mark Freiman says the documents are vital to the commission’s work.

“They are right at the centre of the issues this commission has to grapple with,” he said.

Commission lawyer Mark Freiman said it was “heartening” to hear MacKay promise full co-operation to the Commission when he spoke in the Commons last week.

“I must say, I’m not amused — I completely reject the criticisms of independent counsel” in the ruling, Earl Cherniak of Toronto’s Lerners told The Lawyers Weekly.

Military Police Complaints Commission lawyer Mark Freiman echoed Stannard’s comment as the thorny issue of solicitor-client privilege and redacted documents sparked another round of testy sniping between inquiry lawyers.

Mark Lerner, president of The Advocates’ Society and a partner at Lerners LLP, was instrumental in making this partnership happen.

Richards’ announcement of MacKay’s decision resulted in little progress and several hours of acrimonious exchanges between Richards and Military Police Complaints Commission lawyer Mark Freiman.

“The sky is falling,” responded Commission lawyer Mark Freiman who accused Richards of playing “Chicken Little" and exaggerating the issue.

"Building a practice is multifaceted and there is no magic pill,” says Brian Grant, managing partner of Lerners LLP in Toronto.

But Jason Squire of Lerners LLP, who with senior counsel and colleague Earl Cherniak represents Black, notes there’s a fundamental difference between the ABCP and Hollinger matters.

One of his Toronto lawyers, Lisa Munro of Lerners LLP, noted that the court’s decision sidesteps the difficult question of whether the mere posting of a defamatory statement on a foreign website is actionable here.

"Conrad Black is delighted about the decision of the Supreme Court today," said Lisa Munro, of Lerners LLP, co-counsel for Mr. Black along with Earl A. Cherniak, Q.C.

Lisa Munro, of Lerners LLP, who with Earl Cherniak represented Lord Black, said:

“Conrad Black is delighted about the decision of the Supreme Court today...

Brian Radnoff, a partner at Lerners LLP, says prior to this ruling, the courts recognized non-objective factors like fairness and justice but now the Supreme Court has made it clear that courts should not consider non-objective factors in determining jurisdiction.

Canada's top court ruled Wednesday that Conrad Black could proceed with libel lawsuits against former business associates in the Canadian province of Ontario, but shortly afterward a lawyer for the onetime newspaper tycoon said her client has reached a tentative settlement that would bring the legal dispute to a close.

"We hope to resolve this without any muss or fuss," Commission lawyer Mark Freiman told the inquiry.

“We hope to resolve this without any muss or fuss,” Commission lawyer Mark Freiman told the inquiry.

The public inquiry in Langridge's suicide took a legal diversion Tuesday afternoon with Military Police Complaints Commission lawyer Mark Freiman joining Drapeau in criticizing DND and the federal Justice Department for withholding information.

"It's ludicrous to assume that the commission can do its job without seeing the basis upon which the military made its decisions," said Freiman, who, along with Drapeau, has also complained about delays in getting documents.

Jason Squire, one of the lawyers for the company, said his client is considering taking the case to the Supreme Court.

Jason Squire, a lawyer acting for one of two applicants, said they are considering whether to appeal.

Huron East CAO Brad Knight says Council had sought an opinion from lawyer Fred Tranquilli of Lerners LLP in London.

The city referred the issue to Lerners LLP, a municipal law firm, to oversee the investigation into the claim.

But, the press release said that a second opinion from London, Ont. lawyer Fred Tranquilli of Lerners LLP is “very similar” to that of Huron East solicitor Greg Stewart who said the provincial government has taken away any control municipalities have over renewable energy projects with the Green Energy Act.

But Mark Freiman, who represented the association and Firth in the case, says the court’s decision shows that a nexus between Firth asking the group for identification and racial discrimination occurring can’t simply be assumed.

This is an important case because it lays down principles for when there’s an allegation of racial profiling,” Mr. Freiman said.

Mark Freiman, a lawyer who represented the Peel Law Association in the appeal, said the court’s decision is important because it lays out principles to be followed in cases of alleged racial profiling.

Mark Freiman, a former deputy attorney-general of Ontario and an expert in discrimination law, who argued the appeal on behalf of the respondents, said the ruling strikes an important note of caution, which is especially important in a legal system that views discrimination as subtle, hard to prove, and even sometimes unconscious and unintentional. He said the court rightly followed the advice, written by Supreme Court Justice Rosalie Abella, that “not every distinction is discriminatory.”

Compassion and understanding are key to protecting sexual abuse claimants from revictimization in court, according to a new guide for lawyers released by the Law Society of Upper Canada.

Elizabeth Grace, a contributing author of the guide and a partner at Lerners LLP, says other issues such as cultivating compassion in the legal community in order to help lawyers avoid those pitfalls are also key suggestions outlined in the guide and were important factors in its development.

Rule 48 first surfaced in October 2009 after a series of amendments to the Rules that allowed for quicker dismissals of dormant actions due to delay. Lawyers became worried late last year following warnings that several actions faced dismissal on Jan. 1, 2012, as a result of the change.

At least one prominent lawyer is worried about the changes. According to Andrew Murray of Lerners LLP’s London, Ont., office, the rule has caught many lawyers by surprise and its wording isn’t clear when it comes to the steps they must take to ensure the court doesn’t dismiss their actions.

“I think you will see the bulk effect of this rule in personal injury actions,” says Murray. “None of us knew that our actions would be subject to an automatic dismissal at the first of the month.”

The Supreme Court of Canada’s rejection of Ottawa’s bid for a national securities regulator is a “bad ruling,” Brian Radnoff, a partner at Lerners LLP tells Business News Network in a recent interview.

Under Ontario’s motor vehicle legislation, an accident victim who meets the definition of catastrophic impairment is entitled to claim greater accident benefits, and for life or until the maximum benefits have been paid out. In tort lawsuits arising from car accidents occurring between Nov. 1, 1996 and Sept. 30, 2003, the accident victim must prove he or she sustained a catastrophic impairment to recover health care expenses. A determination of catastrophic impairment often makes a crucial difference to an accident victim’s recovery and quality of life.

In allowing Kusnierz’s appeal it was the first time an appellate court weighed in on the issue of combining psychological and physical impairment.

“On the issue of whether someone has the right to have psychological impairment combined with physical it is clear cut just as it was prior to the Kusnierz trial decision,” says Neil Wheeler, a partner with Lerners LLP in Toronto who acted for plaintiffs Phillipe and Cecille Desbiens in 2004’s Desbiens v. Mordini, which first established the definition for catastrophic impairment combining psychological and physical impairment, which had been adopted by the courts and Financial Services Commission (which regulates accident benefits) up until the Kusnierz case in late 2010.

Jason Squire, a litigator with Lerners LLP in Toronto who didn't represent anyone in the reference case, said the Supreme Court judges were asked only to address whether the federal government's proposed legislation was constitutional, not whether the country would be better off with a single national regulator.

"They're not going to comment on whether it really is a good idea, politically or economically. Effectively, what they're saying is that the problem isn't so much with the act. The problem is that the structure of the Constitution is such that without an amendment, the federal government can't give effect to that good idea unless the provinces come to a series of agreements."

The most ridiculous aspect to all of this is that the court is not even saying a single regulator is a bad idea — in fact, it made some sympathetic noises about the concept. “The courts do not have the power to declare legislation constitutional simply because they conclude it may be the best option in terms of public policy,” the justices said in their judgment.

Short of a constitutional amendment — and that’s not happening — there’s not much to be done. Canada will retain a patchwork of market regulators. “Is there any other country in the world, or at least the West, that tries to regulate securities on a provincial or a state basis?” asked Jason Squire, a partner at Lerners law firm in Toronto.

Lerners LLP partner Brian Radnoff, for example, says the guidance is vague and discretionary. “I think the first question we have to ask ourselves is, has this new test really expanded the availability of summary judgments as it was intended to do?” he says. “I have serious doubts that it has.”

Brad Bain, a partner at Lerners LLP in London, Ont., has many condominium corporation clients and says it’s important to ensure they collect the fees. “There are many condominium corporations that do have owners who don’t pay their fees and it’s critical that they collect,” he says.

Representing Groia is Earl Cherniak, a partner with Lerners LLP. Unlike the law society, which relied exclusively on court documents to present its evidence, Groia’s counsel elected to examine witnesses last week.

“The evidence that we will call will be very critical of the [Ontario Securities Commission] and its approach in the case,” Cherniak told the panel Monday morning.

Groia’s lawyer, Lerners LLP partner Earl Cherniak, fired back. He argued the law society’s prosecution of Groia posed a threat to the independence of the bar, the judiciary, and the public interest, particularly in cases where a defendant lines up against a powerful public body.

Well before he was called to the bar, Seaton Village resident Lucas Lung was devoted to social justice. Now working as a lawyer, he has used his position to help advance causes about which he is passionate.

Lung, who works for Lerners LLP and has also spent time with Legal Aid Ontario, devotes much of his time to pro bono matters, aiming to improve the lives of new Canadians, the financially disadvantaged and others.

“I think that the Court of Appeal’s decision is going to stand for the proposition that the definition of ‘unlawful’ means, in both the tort of civil conspiracy and the tort of interference with economic relations, cannot be stretched as far as what Lord Denning said in Torquay Hotel v. Cousins [1969] 2 Ch. 106 (Eng. C.A.)...that an unlawful act was anything which the defendant ‘is not at liberty to commit,’” commented Purina’s counsel Kirk Stevens of Toronto’s Lerners.

On June 12, Mark J. Freiman, President of the Canadian Jewish Congress was awarded the Samuel Bronfman Medal by the CJC National Board of Directors. The board had met secretly, without Freiman’s knowledge and decided to present him with the award. The Bronfman Medal is known as the highest honour that the Jewish community can bestow. It recognizes those who display “integrity, modesty and a person who has given selflessly to the Jewish community of Canada” according to Bernie Farber, the CJC’s Chief Executive Officer who is currently on leave.

Lerners LLP associate Lucas Lung has won The Advocates’ Society’s 2011 Arleen Goss Young Advocates’ Award for his outstanding record of advocacy and advancement of social justice.

Lung has experience in cases involving immigrants and working with the disadvantaged, including one matter that went to the Supreme Court of Canada this year.

Lucas Lung of Toronto’s Lerners, who with Lisa Loader represented Pritpal Singh Mavi and four other respondents, said the court’s decision not to impose a duty on the Crown to give reasons is a blow to sponsors.

“It is a minimal duty of fairness,” Lung told The Lawyers Weekly. “The practical effect is that sponsors will have the opportunity to make submissions on whether enforcement of debt should be deferred...[but] in terms of whether [the Crown] substantively considered all the submissions properly, it’s going to be very difficult [to challenge].

Future Canadian governments need to consider submissions by those having extraordinary conditions. Representing five out of eight sponsors, Lucas Lung of Lerners LLP, said that sponsors will be allowed to make submissions with regard to federal government obligations for considering their special conditions.

“The jury’s decision, like the judge’s decision on the permanent injunction, shows you can’t say anything you want about someone because they happen to be a director of a publicly traded corporation,” said Brian Radnoff, a partner at Lerners LLP and one of Mr. Astley’s lawyers.

“One of the interesting aspects of this case was the defendant used the shareholder proposal process to make some of the publications that the jury found were defamatory,” says Brian Radnoff, a partner at Lerners LLP and Astley’s other co-counsel.

Under the Bank Act, banks are required to republish shareholder proposals in their own proxy circulars that go to all of their shareholders.

“In this case, that gave them very wide publication,” Radnoff says.

Astley, 65, currently chair of the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board, “is very pleased the litigation has come to a successful conclusion,” said Brian Radnoff, one of his lawyers.

In the fall of 2006, the municipality charged Ducharme with constructing the house at 369 Pryde Blvd. without a building permit. Charges under the Building Code Act included failure to comply with an order to get a building permit, failure to cease construction after the order was issued and removal of a posted order.

Those charges were upheld after Ducharme appealed them.

The matter has been discussed at council meetings several times since then, most recently the May 2 meeting, during which the municipality's lawyer, Andrew Murray of Lerners, appeared before council informing councillors of criteria they can use to decide whether or not to order the house demolished or repaired.

Lawyers for the College of Optometrists of Ontario sent out a news release about the month-old case on Thursday, partly because the licensing body wanted to raise awareness the chain is still in business.

Lawyer Brian Moher has been pursuing Bergez for eight years.

“He was having non-health professionals (analyzing) the eye examinations,” said Moher. “Unfortunately we understand some of them to be high school students dressed up in lab coats.”

Although there was no evidence anyone was ever harmed by the way Great Glasses conducted its business, the Bergezes’ contempt for the court orders was “too bizarre for fiction,” Moher said.

Evidence given by an individual in Canada could be used against that individual in the U.S.

The inquiry’s chief counsel, Mark Freiman of Toronto’s Lerners, led the team of about a dozen lawyers who helped Commissioner Major put together his report over a three-year-period.

Freiman told The Lawyers Weekly the commission has proposed many “cutting edge solutions.” They range from narrowing the ever-expanding, and often unwieldy, amount of material that the Crown has been automatically delivering to the defence in terrorism prosecutions to creating a specialized team of terrorism prosecutors led by a new director of terrorism prosecutions.

Everyone in London, Ont., knows Janet Stewart. It is here that she is the heart and soul of many community endeavours as well as being one of the most respected lawyers in her field. You can see from her curriculum vitae on the web site of Lerners LLP the extent of her interests and the many expressions of gratitude she has received, because she won’t tell you about them. You would need a degree in dentistry to extract any embellishment of her achievements from Stewart herself.

Values are of the utmost importance to Mark Freiman. He has devoted much of his life to public service and has allowed his values to guide his illustrious path.

After taking significant time off from practising law to take a number of public service positions, Freiman recently accepted a post with Lerners LLP’s commercial litigation group.

“I always believe in finding a place that is compatible with my values,” said Freiman in a recent interview with The Lawyers Weekly.

A recent Ontario Divisional Court decision highlights the importance of setting out what the role is of U.S. counsel looking to be involved in class proceedings with Canadian firms in actions launched in this country, says a lawyer involved with the case.

Conversely, Poulin v. Ford Motor Co. of Canada also applies the other way — if an Ontario or Canadian law firm is planning to assist U.S. counsel south of the border, they need a few things “to be clear in their relationship at the outset,” says Jason Squire, a partner at Lerners LLP.

The decision leaves Mr. Drabinsky and Mr. Gottlieb required to pay a $36.6-million (U.S.) judgment stemming from a suit launched by U.S. investors after Livent's collapse in 1998. The court also ordered the two to pay the legal costs of the shareholders for the appeal challenge.

Lawyer Jasmine Akbarali of Toronto law firm Lerners LLP, who represented the U.S. shareholder group, said the amount owed, including interest and legal costs, will likely exceed $40-million.

Jasmine Akbarali, a lawyer from the investor's law firm Lerners, said the SCC ruling "means it's the end of the road for them [Mr. Drabinsky and Mr. Gottlieb] in contesting whether the New York judgment is enforceable in Ontario. We are now in the process of enforcing that judgment."

Jasmine Akbarali, a lawyer from the investor’s law firm Lerners, said the SCC ruling "means it’s the end of the road for them [Mr. Drabinsky and Mr. Gottlieb] in contesting whether the New York judgment is enforceable in Ontario. We are now in the process of enforcing that judgment."

Ms. Akbarali said the Supreme Court's decision brings an end to the legal odyssey because there is no further recourse in either country for the two men. "These guys have not been shy about exercising their appeal rights - they've appealed everything all the way along the line, and have lost at every stage," she said.

The Superior Court of Justice has given the red light to a legal argument that could have kept lawyers from acting against any client loosely affiliated with a company they work for.

Jasmine Akbarali says there wasn’t much case law that ‘talked about what sorts of obligations you might owe to a subsidiary of your client.’

Lerners LLP lawyer Jasmine Akbarali, who represented the plaintiff in McKenna v. Gammon Gold Inc. with colleague Earl Cherniak, says the key issue in the case was “Who is your client?"

The conflict ruling will likely be cheered by Bay Street and national law firms. Many large law firms have tripped up on conflict issues and been called to task by judges when they have tried to act against former or current clients. That has lead to a number of legal decisions that attempt to establish a "bright line test" covering the duty of loyalty and when it applies.

Earl Cherniak, a lawyer at Lerners in Toronto, who argued on behalf of Siskinds against the banks' motion, said "the case will have significant interest in the legal community.

This clarifies something that was really unclear ... the extent to which the conflict rules extend to near-clients or in this case subsidiaries of a parent. This is the first case on that point.

The lawsuits are believed to be the first ever filed in Ontario, said lawyer Peter Kryworuk.

If these lawsuits succeed, he said, others could follow.

Earl Cherniak of Lerners in Toronto, who represented Honda along with Jasmine Akbarali and Roslynn Kogan, told The Lawyers Weekly the decision is salutary for employers because the court “went out of their way to reiterate that punitive damages are reserved for truly egregious cases, and just because there is an element of bad faith or misconduct or the like it does not follow that punitive damages are appropriate.”

Employers across the country are breathing a little easier when it comes to handling issues of accommodation and absenteeism after the Supreme Court threw out an unprecedented wrongful dismissal award.

Honda’s lawyer, Earl Cherniak of Lerners LLP, says employers are “wholly relieved at the decision.”

In a brief to the Supreme Court on behalf of Honda, lawyers Earl Cherniak and Jasmine Akbarali argued that the Court of Appeal took the ground out from under Judge McIsaac's harsh judgment by finding that Honda did not run amok or engage in "corporate malfeasance.

The import of these findings is that there was no bad faith on the part of Honda and no conduct justifying an award of punitive damages."

The Avriths and a handful of other wealthy individuals have fallen through the cracks during the tortuous process to restructure the ABCP market, which has been frozen since last August.

Lisa Munro, a lawyer acting for the family, will argue for a broader test of what constitutes hardship, saying the family should qualify. "We think there are fairness and hardship issues that are not reflected in the criteria [that] have put forward," she said. The family argues it should be considered a retail, not corporate, client and believes the bank "has not followed through with what it stated was its intention to do and pay out retail investors," she said.

Don’t be afraid to take a risk and sign up for cases with contingency fees on behalf of disabled plaintiffs, says Toronto lawyer Kirk Stevens.

“The focus is going to be on access to justice for more people, as opposed to just maximizing the recovery for a particular injured plaintiff,” says Kirk Stevens.

“That’s because if they are successful and achieve excellent results, then there can be rewards,” Stevens tells Law Times, referring to a recent decision tackling the issue of contingency fees charged to persons under a legal disability.

Class-action law firms Sutts, Strosberg and Lerners won a major legal squirmish when Ontario Superior Court Justice Maurice Cullity gave the green light to their suit against medical device-maker Guidant Corp., now part of Boston Scientific.

Earl Cherniak and Kirk Stevens of Lerners LLP, who with trial lawyer Nancy Ralph represented the plaintiffs at the appeal, told The Lawyers Weekly this is the largest personal injury award affirmed at the appellate level in Canada.

In a press release, Lerners said Ralph was thrilled with the result. “At last,” she was quoted as saying, “this case confirms that survivors of severe brain injury can receive the cap in general damages.”

Ms. Akbarali was a member of the Lerners team representing the investors in the Danier case. This prospectus misrepresentation case was the first trial of a class action relating to the civil liability of corporate issuers and their directors for misrepresentation in a prospectus.

Ms. Akbarali has summarized the case issues for ReportonBusiness.com.

The personal injury bar is “deeply split” over the value of videotaping defence medical examinations, says one lawyer involved in the debate.

The plaintiff side of the equation has been increasingly asking for, and receiving, court orders to videotape the independent examinations, says Kelly Tranquilli, a member of the insurance defence and health law practice groups in the London, Ont., office of Lerners LLP. But the defence bar has “very valid” concerns about the prejudicial effect of these recordings, she tells Law Times.

Kirk Boggs, a Toronto lawyer who frequently represents police, predicted that police will find themselves targeted in costly, nuisance lawsuits that harm their reputations and tie them up in court for years. These cases will inevitably feature a great deal of conflicting expert testimony about what investigative steps were or were not sound, he said.

Another civil case to seek compensation for the victims of Ralph Rowe is a possibility.

Civil lawyer Elizabeth Grace from Toronto firm Lerners LLP, who was one of the lawyers handling civil cases involving victims of Rowe in 2005, said there may be another one pending.

Although she couldn't go into details as to how the previous case was resolved, Grace noted civil court is an option.

"I would encourage other victims of Ralph Rowe to consider it an option," she said from her office in Toronto.

It was heartfelt thanks all around at Wednesday's partner appreciation night at the Hilton Hotel.

Shmuel Farhi is wearing his heart on his sleeve with this initiative that has led to $3.6 million for the Ivey Heart Centre.

Some who were invited to the reception in honour of their contribution to the cause were Vito Frijia, Southside Construction; Jamie Crich, Auburn Homes; Leonard Drimmer, Transglobe Property Management Services; Jack Sousa, Brown Beattie O'Donovan LLP; Joel McLean, Info-Tech Research Group; Janet Stewart and David Woodward from Lerners; Jeff Lowe, Citi Financial; Mike Johnston, Mycon Construction; Damir and Renata Slogar from Big Blue Bubble as well as Dianne Decaluwe and Piper Badgley, both from JJ Barnike.

[The Global Talent Initiative] is also critical to new Canadians, who arrive here overwhelmed by language and culture, often not knowing where to turn for help, said Edgar Marquez, a law clerk at Lerners law firm who came to London three years ago from Colombia. He received assistance from the Cross Cultural Learner Centre, the Latin Centre and WIL Employment Connections. Marquez volunteered at social agencies, a seniors' home and restaurant before landing a job.

Kirk Boggs and Kirk Stevens of Lerners LLP in Toronto and Laird Scrimshaw of Martin Scrimshaw Scott in Thunder Bay acted for Wawanesa. Boggs told The Lawyers Weekly they were “very pleased with the end result, because it clarifies the law in a number of areas for insurers and insureds: It confirms that the wording of the intentional OR criminal acts exclusion is not ambiguous. It confirms that the wording of the exclusion is disjunctive – excluding damage from an intentional act OR a criminal act. It confirms that the application of the criminal acts exclusion is not limited to criminal acts where the insured intends to cause injury or damage. Otherwise the same result would be achieved merely by excluding intentional acts."

Toronto lawyer Kirk Stevens, who sought the appeal on behalf of the lion safari, said yesterday's ruling puts an end to more than a decade of litigation. All that remains is for the insurers to pay the costs and damages to the plaintiffs and their families.

"But that doesn't mean the court will necessarily agree with the Court of Appeal should a similar issue arise in the future."

On May 1, 2006, Prime Minister Stephen Harper called the Commission of Inquiry into the Investigation of the Bombing of Air India Flight 182, which exploded in mid-air on June 23, 1985.

The lead counsel in the inquiry is Mark Freiman, a Toronto attorney and former deputy attorney general of Ontario. Michel Dorval, a former Crown prosecutor for the attorney general of Quebec, will be co-counsel.

Ontario's insurance companies can exclude coverage for liability on the basis of criminal acts, regardless of whether or not the criminal act was intentional, the Ontario Court of Appeal has ruled.

Kirk Boggs, a lawyer with Lerners — along with Kirk Stevens of Lerners and Laird Scrimshaw of Thunder Bay — represented The Wawanesa Mutual Insurance Company before the appeal court.

"The insurance industry will benefit from the decision because it clearly defines when they can exclude coverage for criminal behaviour," Boggs said in a press release, "Policies containing criminal acts exclusions are written every day throughout this country and the Court of Appeal has now clarified that intent has no place in interpreting the exclusion."

Elizabeth Grace's downtown Toronto office is what I expected. Large and spacious. It has a quietly muscular feel. Grace, on the other hand, is not what I expected. It's casual day at the office, so instead of a power suit I find the 33 year-old lawyer in black jeans and jacket. When we sit down to talk, she echoes what heard from other civil litigators involved in these types of suits.

"The law is incredibly powerful. If you have that knowledge and you work in a bigger firm, it really helps. There was some resistance at first [to her firm taking on abuse cases]. They wondered, was it financially feasible? But they've been supportive."

Kathryn recalls how impressed she was when she met Elizabeth Grace. She remembers how Grace fought for her, refusing to lower the amount of the claim and backing it up in a way her legal-aid lawyer hadn't. There was emotional support too. Grace made a point of calling, just to touch base and see how her client was holding up. She also stayed in close contact with Kathryn's doctors.