WWW.LEXPERT.CA
|
2018
|
LEXPERT 25
Howard, Peter F.C. Stikeman Elliott LLP
(416) 869-5613 phoward@stikeman.com
Mr. Howard is a partner in the Litigation & Dispute Resolution Group. His
practice focuses on commercial litigation, including securities law, class
actions, commercial contracts, oppression and other types of shareholder
and/or joint-venture litigation and insolvency matters. He has appeared
before the Supreme Court of Canada and the Ontario Securities Commission.
Hoaken, Eric R. Lax O'Sullivan Lisus Gottlieb LLP
(416) 645-5075 ehoaken@counsel-toronto.com
Mr. Hoaken's litigation practice is primarily focused on class proceedings
but also includes health law matters and complex commercial litigation such
as shareholders' disputes, directors' and officers' liability issues
and contractual disputes. He is a fellow of the IATL.
Himo, Julie Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP
(514) 847-6017 julie.himo@nortonrosefulbright.com
Ms. Himo practises commercial litigation, with an emphasis on corporate
insolvency and restructurings, as well as corporate and securities litigation.
She has considerable experience in insolvency and restructuring matters,
shareholders' disputes, securities litigation, including as they relate to plans
of arrangement, as well as extraordinary remedies such as seizures
and injunctions.
Hill, David G. (Dave) Hill Sokalski Walsh Olson LLP
(204) 954-0750 dhill@hillco.mb.ca
Mr. Hill founded the firm on February 1, 1988. He has been named Litigator
of the Year for Manitoba by Benchmark Canada 3 times. His expertise in
advocacy is reflected in a number of leading cases involving economic torts,
environmental claims, and contractual disputes. He has successfully handled
7 shareholder disputes under s. 234 of The Corporations Act (Manitoba)
and s. 241 of the CBCA.
Heelan, QC, James J. Bennett Jones LLP
(780) 917-4275 heelanj@bennettjones.com
Mr. Heelan, QC, has experience in a range of litigation and regulatory
matters. His practice has a particular focus on corporate/commercial
disputes, representing financial institutions and investment advisors,
in addition to employment and professional negligence matters,
with a particular emphasis on representing physicians.
Hausman, David A. Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP
(416) 868-3486 dhausman@fasken.com
Mr. Hausman practises exclusively in the field of securities litigation.
Regularly representing investment dealers, public companies, mutual funds,
directors and officers, he advises clients on regulatory investigations and
proceedings before provincial securities commissions, all Canadian stock
exchanges and self-regulatory organizations.
LEXPERT-RANKED LAWYERS
the least, Groia, who is
known to be a zealous
advocate, alleged pros-
ecutorial misconduct,
especially regarding is-
sues of disclosure and
admissibility of docu-
ments. He was oen
sarcastic in speak-
ing about the OSC's
prosecutors, whom he
called "lazy," and he
referred to the OSC as
"the Government."
In 2009, the Law
Society of Upper Canada (as the LSO was then
known) initiated disciplinary proceedings against
Groia, saying he had engaged in professional mis-
conduct by acting uncivilly during the trial. He
was found guilty of being rude and disruptive and
ultimately fined $200,000 and assessed a one-
month suspension. Groia appealed but the finding
was upheld first in Divisional Court and then by
the Ontario Court of Appeal.
When the SCC ultimately ruled in Groia's
favour, it sent several clear messages to the pro-
fession. One was that a "multi-factorial, context-
specific approach" to determining whether in-
court behaviour crosses the line into professional
misconduct on the basis of incivility "was appro-
priate." is wording, as well as the entire decision
by the SCC, says Malcolm Mercer, a Partner in
McCarthy Tétrault LLP's Litigation Group in To-
ronto and the new LSO Treasurer, provides "help-
ful guidance" to the profession. e SCC said that
the question of what constitutes civility "is context
specific. You have to look at what the lawyer said,
the manner and frequency in which it was said and
the presiding judge's reaction to it."
e SCC also said that when allegations in
court are based on errors in law (such as Groia
claiming prosecutorial misconduct), they do not
constitute incivility when they are based on good
faith. Of greater importance, perhaps to the legal
governing bodies, the SCC affirmed that the law
societies are the arbiters of what constitutes civil-
ity: "eir decisions respecting professional mis-
conduct should be approached with deference."
Cherniak had argued that, "except in certain
cases, the law society's jurisdiction should stop at
the courtroom door except when the judge com-
plains to the law society [which never happened
in Groia] or finds the lawyer in contempt of court.
I made that argument all the way up but no one
bought it."
What the SCC did not do, however, was pro-
vide an ultimate definition of civility. Terrence
O'Sullivan, Senior Counsel at Lax O'Sullivan
Lisus Gottlieb LLP in Toronto, who represented
