20 LEXPERT
|
2018
|
WWW.LEXPERT.CA
Garland, Steven Smart & Biggar
(613) 232-2486 sbgarland@smart-biggar.ca
Mr. Garland is one of Canada's leading IP litigators and managing partner
of Smart & Biggar. He has over 25 years of trial and appellate experience in
intellectual property litigation of all types and is praised by peers and clients
as being "among the best." His recent victory for the Dow Chemical Company
netted one of the largest court cost awards in Canadian Federal Court history.
Gardner, Alan P. Bennett Jones LLP
(416) 777-6231 gardnera@bennettjones.com
Mr. Gardner is the head of the firm's Securities Litigation Practice Group.
With a focus on securities, and other regulatory and cross-border
investigations, he most often represents financial institutions and
public companies, as well as board members, senior management and
Special Committees of public companies involved in securities regulatory
investigations and shareholder litigation.
Galway, Jeff W. Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP
(416) 863-3859 jeff.galway@blakes.com
Mr. Galway is a senior partner well-known for handling complex commercial
disputes and his formidable strength in securities, competition and class
action defence. He advises on proceedings throughout Canada and manages
cross-border disputes with international counsel. He has appeared as
counsel in a number of provincial superior courts, as well as the Federal
Court of Canada and the SCC.
Gaikis, Gunars Smart & Biggar
(416) 593-5514 ggaikis@smart-biggar.ca
Mr. Gaikis is one of Canada's premier and most experienced life sciences
intellectual property litigators with over 30 years of experience in the highly
specialized field of pharmaceutical patent, trademark and litigation. His win
on behalf of AstraZeneca represented a significant victory for innovators
seeking protection in Canada, when the Supreme Court "wholly rejected
the promise doctrine."
Fuerst, Linda L. Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP
(416) 216-2951 linda.fuerst@nortonrosefulbright.com
Ms. Fuerst's litigation practice covers a range of commercial matters,
focusing on securities litigation, class actions and regulatory issues. She
has appeared before all levels of court in Ontario, provincial securities
commissions and IIROC.
Friend, QC, Anthony L. Bennett Jones LLP
(403) 298-3182 frienda@bennettjones.com
Mr. Friend is a senior partner in the litigation group, practising in the areas
of commercial, securities and energy litigation. He focuses on the defence
of medical malpractice claims, arbitration and corporate arrangements and
restructurings. He appears as counsel before all court levels in Alberta and
the Supreme Court of Canada. He also appears before numerous boards
and tribunals.
LEXPERT-RANKED LAWYERS
ject to are insufficient for them to be considered a
person at risk."
Nathalie Goyette, a Partner at PwC Law LLP
in Montréal, says overall the ruling is a "serious,
solid analysis" but added that the decision on the
so-called saving provision "is quite novel. e ques-
tion it raises is: how much at risk do you need to be
to be considered 'at risk'?
"e judge said there is some risk here, but not
enough to be 'at risk.' So I imagine, but I don't
know, that part of the appeal will argue how much
at risk you need to be at to be at risk, because the
[bank] won on all other aspects. If you talk to other
practitioners, they'll tell you that's the very novel,
the very interesting aspect of this case."
Innes of Rueters says, "if the decision has any
Achilles heel, that's probably it. e judge basically
said the risk is illusionary. I don't know what the
evidence was but, if the Court of Appeal is going
to attack anything, I think it would be that. When
