LEXPERT®Ranked Lawyers
Nicholl, John I.S.
Clyde & Co Canada LLP
(855) 607-4288
john.nicholl@clydeco.ca
Mr. Nicholl practises in
both Quebec and Ontario,
and has extensive trial
and appellate experience
acting on behalf of
insurers and reinsurers
in defence and coverage
litigation and arbitration.
He is a frequent speaker
on insurance coverage
issues.
O'Neill, Louis-Martin
Davies Ward Phillips
& Vineberg LLP
(514) 841-6547
lmoneill@dwpv.com
Mr. O'Neill's practice
embraces a broad
spectrum of complex
M&A, securities,
corporate and
commercial disputes,
insolvency restructurings,
as well as white-collar
investigations and
defence work.
Orzy, S. Richard
Bennett Jones LLP
(416) 777-5737
orzyr@bennettjones.com
Co-leader of
Restructuring Practice.
Acts for debtors and
creditors in major
domestic and cross-
border restructuring
and insolvency matters.
His clients include
bondholders, indenture
trustees, court offi cers,
fi nancial institutions
and insurers.
Nitikman, Joel A.
Dentons Canada LLP
(604) 443-7115
joel.nitikman@
dentons.com
Mr. Nitikman focuses
on and has extensive
experience in federal and
provincial tax litigation.
He has appeared before
the Tax Court of Canada,
the Federal Court of
Appeal and the Supreme
Court of Canada.
O'Sullivan, LSM,
Terrence J.
Lax O'Sullivan Scott
Lisus LLP
(416) 598-3556
tosullivan@
counsel-toronto.com
Mr. O'Sullivan's litigation
and arbitration practices
focus on business
disputes, fi nancial
institution litigation,
regulatory charges and
defence of directors and
offi cers liability. He acts
as a mediator, arbitrator
and is an ACTL and
IATL Fellow.
Osborne, Peter
Lenczner Slaght Royce
Smith Griffi n LLP
(416) 865-3094
posborne@litigate.com
One of Canada's leading
litigators, Mr. Osborne
has a broad civil litigation
and administrative law
practice encompassing
commercial disputes,
complex insolvency, class
actions and securities
matters.
regulating you.
"Sometimes you want to settle with them, set the mat-
ter aside, but you have this pending civil litigation stopping
you. So if you have the chance to get rid of a big headache,
continue to have a good relationship with the regulator, and
move on and continue your battle on the civil action, it's a
great option."
When it comes to securities enforcement, the policing of
insider trading is the other clear hot button these days. e
Ontario Securities Commission, like many other provincial
regulators, has made illegal insider trading a major focus.
Insider trading cases can be notoriously diffi cult to
prove because they generally involve strong circumstantial
evidence.
Gray says regulators have become increasingly willing to
use the public-interest jurisdiction to punish people in cases
where the actions being alleged fall short of running afoul
of the law.
" ere have been a number of cases, including some in
Alberta and some in British Columbia, where people are
being criticized and in many cases sanctioned by regulators
for being too close to the line in terms of insider trading —
particularly around transactions and where the individuals
are relatively high up in the organization," he says. " at's the
securities-law development that people should defi nitely be
keeping their eye on."
While the use of the public-interest jurisdiction is not
new, practitioners say it was designed for exceptional cir-
cumstances involving serious conduct that brings Canadian
capital markets into disrepute.
ere is a growing sense that regulators are more willing
to use it as an everyday tool, a way to issue sanctions in cases
where they can't prove an actual breach of the act.
In Ontario, an OSC panel declined to do that in a case in-
volving the acquisition of Baffi nland Iron Mines Corp. Two
well-connected mining executives were accused of insider
trading and tipping, and OSC staff requested the pair also
be found to have engaged in conduct contrary to the public
interest even if cleared of the other charges.
e OSC panel declined to do so.
Jeff rey Leon, a litigation partner at Bennett Jones LLP,
welcomed the result.
"Somebody should be able to look at the statute, attempt
to stay within it, and it's only in the most blatant cases where
you take advantage of something and really act in a way that
hurts the capital markets that the commission should fall
back on the public-interest jurisdiction."
In Alberta, securities regulators have also been frustrated
in attempts to get panels to accept strong circumstantial evi-
dence, says John Blair, national head of the commercial liti-
gation group at Borden Ladner Gervais LLP.
" ere have been outright acquittals on four insider trad-
ing cases — this is what most people in Alberta are talking
about in enforcement issues these days," says Blair, who's
based in Calgary. "But all these cases are helping them deter-
mine what the panels will consider it convincing that there's
been an illegal trade."
Canadian regulators are coming under pressure because
the SEC is prosecuting insider trading cases so vigorously,
says Campion.
"I think they're feeling the heat to get on with it because
American regulators are so aggressive. We just don't seem to
have been as aggressive."
Securities Enforcement | 29
