WWW.LEXPERT.CA
|
2016
|
LEXPERT 21
Halfnight, Jamieson Halfnight & McKinlay Profes-
sional Corporation (416) 361-3082 jhalfnight@halfnightlaw.com
Recognized as one of the top insurance lawyers in Canada, Mr. Halfnight
conducts a specialty insurance and reinsurance litigation practice, advising
clients both in Canada and internationally, and appearing in both trial and
appellate courts. He regularly lectures and publishes on insurance and litiga-
tion subjects.
Gunn, QC, FCIArb, Angus M. Borden Ladner
Gervais LLP (604) 640-4084 agunn@blg.com
Mr. Gunn practises commercial dispute resolution with a focus on interna-
tional and domestic commercial arbitration, appellate matters and public
law disputes. He regularly appears in the courts of British Columbia as well
as the Federal Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court of Canada. He also
accepts appointments as arbitrator and mediator. He is very active in the
pro bono community.
Guay, François Smart & Biggar/Fetherstonhaugh
(514) 954-1500 fguay@smart-biggar.ca
Mr. Guay's IP litigation practice focuses on patents, trademarks, industrial
designs, copyright, unfair competition, trade secrets and computer-related
technology. He has practised exclusively in IP litigation for over 30 years, and
is among the most experienced IP litigators in Canada. His briefs embrace
extraordinary recourses such as injunctions and seizures.
Groia, Joseph Groia & Company Professional Corporation
(416) 203-4472 jgroia@groiaco.com
Mr. Groia practises securities litigation in civil, regulatory and criminal cases.
He was the OSC's Director of Enforcement prior to opening his own securities
litigation boutique, Groia & Company, in 2000. He co-authored Canada's
only securities litigation textbook. In May 2015, Mr. Groia was elected by the
Ontario Bar to serve as Bencher of the Law Society of Upper Canada.
Griffin, Peter Lenczner Slaght Royce Smith Griffin LLP
(416) 865-2921 pgriffin@litigate.com
Mr. Griffin is recognized by his peers as one of the top litigators in Canada.
He has extensive experience in a broad cross-section of litigation including
multi-jurisdictional, class proceeding and insolvency and restructuring dis-
putes. He is a Fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers.
Gottlieb, Matthew P. Lax O'Sullivan Lisus Gottlieb LLP
(416) 644-5353 mgottlieb@counsel-toronto.com
Mr. Gottlieb focuses on business litigation, including commercial,
securities and insolvency and restructuring litigation. He appears at all
levels of Ontario courts and the courts of other provinces, the OSC,
the Federal Court and the SCC.
LEXPERT-RANKED LAWYERS
ten used to refuse to settle a case if they had to ad-
mit wrongdoing because they faced the threat of
being sued in civil court and having that admis-
sion being used against them. "ey would drag
it out, bring motions, insist on disclosure and go
through a lengthy hearing — or at least drag out
the discussions until they settled the civil case,"
says MacKewn. "Now, with no-contest settle-
ments, you don't have to admit wrongdoing. It's
a way to bring the regulatory proceeding to a
quicker conclusion."
Negotiating with OSC staff in the enforce-
ment branch presents another set of problems.
Because most regulatory proceedings settle,
rather than progress to a contested hearing, ne-
gotiating with regulatory staff has become a key
component of the enforcement process. Howev-
er, it is ordinarily not possible to have meaning-
ful off-the-record discussions with Commission
staff because they usually won't agree to it.
"When you know you are on the record, and
there is a room full of staff taking notes, everyone
on the issuer or respondent side of the meeting
watches their words very carefully," says John Fa-
bello, a partner at Torys LLP in Toronto. "is
can inhibit a free exchange of ideas.
"Our experience with Commission staff is
somewhat in contrast with self-regulating or-
ganizations such as IIROC [Investment Indus-
try Regulatory Organization of Canada] and
MFDA [Mutual Fund Dealers Association of
Canada] staff, who are usually much more will-
ing to have 'without prejudice' discussions."
In March 2016, an Ontario Securities Com-
mission panel denied Catalyst Capital Group
legal standing when it applied for a postpone-
ment of Corus Entertainment Inc.'s acquisition
of Shaw Media. In issuing their reasons, the OSC
Commissioners provided guidance on the role of
OSC staff in third-party applications regarding
transactions, such as mergers and acquisitions,
within the Commission's jurisdiction.
e typical case might involve (as in Catalyst's
application) a third party seeking to slow down
an acquisition or a rival bidder seeking to have
the opportunity to place its own offer before
the target company's shareholders or to have
the target company's poison pill cease-traded.
e Commission said that their staff are not to
be "gatekeepers" with respect to third-party de-
cisions on whether to seek standing before the
tribunal. "e kinds of relief that a court can or-
der, and the costs of obtaining that relief, make
going to the Commission, if you can get in front
