WWW.LEXPERT.CA
|
2017
|
LEXPERT 35
Rosenberg, Ken Paliare Roland Rosenberg Rothstein LLP
(416) 646-4304 ken.rosenberg@paliareroland.com
Mr. Rosenberg's practice focuses on commercial, corporate, shareholder,
regulatory and insolvency/restructuring disputes. He has acted as counsel
to a wide range of stakeholders including debtors, secured and unsecured
creditors, pension plans, unions, class action plaintiffs, court officers
and public/government authorities.
Rodrigo, Nick Davies Ward Phillips & Vineberg LLP
(514) 841-6548 nrodrigo@dwpv.com
Mr. Rodrigo specializes in corporate litigation, focusing on class actions in
the securities, competition and consumer law fields. He has acted in several
major shareholder disputes and has a broad range of trial and appellate
experience, including at the Supreme Court of Canada. He acts for clients
across a wide range of industries, including telecommunications, retail,
mining and technology.
Rochon, Joel P. Rochon Genova LLP
(416) 363-1867 jrochon@rochongenova.com
Mr. Rochon is managing partner at Rochon Genova LLP, and heads the firm's
class action practice. He has served as lead or co-lead counsel on numerous
national class actions, including Nortel, Toyota and ongoing cases involving
CIBC, SNC Lavalin, market timing in Mutual Funds, Bell/Telus, Volkswagen
and the Lac-Mégantic train derailment.
Ritchie, Lawrence E. Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP
(416) 862-6608 lritchie@osler.com
Mr. Ritchie's practice involves dispute avoidance and resolution across a
range of capital markets, the financial sector and other regulated industries
and activities. His experience encompasses all aspects of enforcement and
other regulatory proceedings and related litigation, including class actions.
Ritch, QC, Murray J. Ritch Williams & Richards
(902) 429-3400 mritch@rwrlawyers.ca
Mr. Ritch has a national and international practice, with particular emphasis
on insurance, commercial and construction litigation, including professional
and product liability and personal injury. He has appeared at all levels
of Court in Atlantic Canada.
Rigaud, Sylvain Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP
(514) 847-4702 sylvain.rigaud@nortonrosefulbright.com
Mr. Rigaud's practice focuses mainly on business restructuring and
insolvency, and has maintained an active commercial litigation practice
at trial and on appeal in bankruptcy-related disputes and in complex
valuation and loss quantification cases. Mr. Rigaud acts as chair
of the firm's restructuring and insolvency practice.
LEXPERT-RANKED LAWYERS
New York contract law, Kyrgyz corporate law and
Ontario procedural law. Justice Russell Juriansz,
writing for the Court of Appeal, described her
interpretation of a contract called the Agreement
on New Terms (ANT) as "thorough and per-
suasive," and concluded that the appellants' case
lacked "a solid conceptual underpinning."
Only Entes and Sistem remained as appel-
lants by the time leave to appeal was sought at
the Supreme Court of Canada; Stans had not
joined the appeal to Ontario's Court of Appeal,
and Belokoņs did not seek leave to appeal to the
Supreme Court aer his award was set aside by
the Court of Appeal of Paris due to the money-
laundering concerns that Justice Matheson had
declined to consider.
e applicants had argued that the ANT be-
tween Centerra, KJSC, Cameco Corporation
(another shareholder), and Kyrgyzstan estab-
lished Kyrgyzstan's ownership interest in the
Centerra shares. In the alternative, the parties
argued that the shares were being held by KJSC
on either an express trust or a resulting trust for
Kyrgyzstan. Ultimately, none of the four appli-
cants were able to demonstrate that Kyrgyzstan
owned any interest in the shares, either by con-
tract or trust.
e applicants had relied on a recital in the
ANT that described KJSC as holding the shares
"on behalf of " Kyrgyzstan as evidence that the
state has an ownership interest in the shares.
Justice Conway observed that the recitals sim-
ply reflected the fact that the state was the sole
shareholder in KJSC, and held that the opera-
tive clauses of the ANT did not demonstrate
that the Republic had any ownership interest in
the shares. Justice Conway considered both the
recitals and operative clauses and concluded that
the contract was unambiguous: KJSC owns the
Centerra shares in its own right.
ese cases serve as important reminders of
limitations on the enforcement of international
arbitral awards and the extraordinary relief of the
Mareva injunction.
Matthew Latella and Christina Doria of Baker
& McKenzie LLP acted for Kyrgyzaltyn.
George Pollack and Steven Frankel of Davies
Ward Phillips & Vineberg LLP represented
Sistem Mühendislik.
Robert Wisner and Stephen Brown-Okruhlik
of McMillan LLP acted for Entes.
Robb Heintzman and Chloe Snider of Den-
tons Canada LLP represented Valērijs Belokoņs.
Lincoln Caylor, Ranjan Agarwal and Matthew
Kronby of Bennett Jones LLP acted for Stans
Energy before the Mareva set-aside; John Terry,
Myriam Seers and Vitali Berditchevski of Torys
LLP acted aerwards.
Aaron Rubinoff, Joël Dubois and John Siwiec
