10 LEXPERT
|
2016
|
WWW.LEXPERT.CA
Campion, John A. Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP
(416) 865-4357 jcampion@fasken.com
Mr. Campion's trial and appeal practice has produced over 300 reported
decisions from courts including the SCC, tribunals and arbitrations. His
experience includes class action, corporate/commercial, mining, energy,
competition and securities cases.
Campbell, A. Neil McMillan LLP
(416) 865-7025 neil.campbell@mcmillan.ca
Mr. Campbell is one of Canada's pre-eminent competition lawyers. His com-
petition law practice focuses on merger clearances under the Competition
Act; reviews under the Investment Canada Act; representation in cartel
and abuse of dominance.
Cameron, Donald M. Bereskin & Parr LLP
(416) 957-1171 dcameron@bereskinparr.com
Mr. Cameron's practice focuses on intellectual property ("IP") litigation,
particularly relating to patent, trademark, copyright, trade secrets law and
technology licences. He has participated in IP litigation cases involving a
broad range of technologies and businesses, and he is certified by The Law
Society of Upper Canada as a Specialist in IP Law and Civil Litigation.
Callaghan, John E. Gowling WLG
(416) 369-6693 john.callaghan@gowlingwlg.com
Mr. Callaghan has a broad practice. He appears before all levels of courts
and tribunals. His expertise is often sought for complex cases and he has
been described as "unflappable" in his handling of the myriad of cases
in which he is involved.
Byers, David R. Stikeman Elliott LLP
(416) 869-5697 dbyers@stikeman.com
Mr. Byers is co-chair of the firm's national litigation practice. He is highly
experienced in complex commercial litigation, including insolvency, product
liability, securities, as well as in domestic and international arbitration. He
has acted for companies and their management in a wide range of industries,
including manufacturing, technology, pharmaceutical, financial services
and tobacco.
Burke, Andrea L. Davies Ward Phillips & Vineberg LLP
(416) 367-6908 aburke@dwpv.com
Ms. Burke specializes in civil litigation with a focus on business
disputes and all types of commercial litigation. She has significant M&A
and securities litigation experience, including securities class actions,
enforcement proceedings and contested transaction matters. She frequently
acts for mining companies and has a proven track record handling multi-
jurisdictional disputes.
LEXPERT-RANKED LAWYERS
"We had a decision one year to
the day after the process began.
If we had gone to court, I doubt
we would even have had an
exchange of pleadings in a year."
- George MacDonald, Pink Larkin
that process is generally quicker and less expensive
than litigation, it is not always the method pre-
ferred by corporate counsel. For example, corpor-
ate counsel usually don't turn to arbitration to
resolve IP disputes, says Cicchetti:
"When the IP is a big corporate asset, they
would never agree to arbitrate the ownership of
the IP because, for them, that's the crown jewels,
and they can't be in a situation where they have
lost the crown jewels with no ability to appeal."
Hunter, for his part, believes that litigation
processes have been "creeping their way into arbi-
tration and making them take as long" as a court
case. He also points out that, in some ways, arbi-
tration can be more expensive "because you're pay-
ing for your judge."
Another cause for corporate counsel's hesita-
tion, says Binnie, is the human concern about
being blamed if something goes wrong: "If you
take a case to court, nobody is going to fault you
if it goes badly because you've taken a risk with a
known state institution. But if things go badly [in
arbitration], you're the one who set up the dispute
resolution tribunal and some corporate counsel
don't like that responsibility."
Despite some reservations about arbitration, it
has become increasingly popular. "ere's been a
huge sea change [in its acceptance]," says Binnie.
"In the last 20 years it's really achieved the kind of
momentum it deserves. I get the impression since
returning to practice that it is now very much the
mechanism of choice to solve disputes."
ADR has become so prevalent, MacDonald
says, that there is a "mandatory [ADR] provision
in all construction projects that use the standard
CCDC [Canadian Construction Documents
Committee] contracts. You can't go to court. You
appoint someone who is the project mediator, and
that person becomes familiar with the projects
and any disputes that arise … and that person re-
solves them."
Another option for parties looking for ADR
solutions is something called med-arb. "ey've
now developed a mixed hybrid," says Lax, "where
they start off by exploring the possibility of com-
ing up with a resolution through mediation. If
they can't work out an agreement, then the med-
arb person changes hats and becomes an arbitra-
tor and proceeds to a decision."
