8 LEXPERT
|
2017
|
WWW.LEXPERT.CA
Brock, AdE, William Davies Ward Phillips & Vineberg LLP
(514) 841-6438 wbrock@dwpv.com
Litigation partner whose practice is focused on complex commercial,
corporate and securities litigation and arbitration, including relating to
mergers & acquisitions, contractual and shareholders disputes and fraud
claims. Conducts litigation at trial and appellate levels, including before the
Supreme Court of Canada. He has represented Canada's leading companies
and government institutions.
Bredt, Christopher D. Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
(416) 367-6165 cbredt@blg.com
Mr. Bredt is a senior litigation partner and leader of BLG's Public Law Group.
He is a bencher of the LSUC. He practises civil litigation, with an emphasis on
commercial disputes, anti-piracy actions, corporate restructuring, directors'
and officers' duties and liabilities, shareholder oppression and other
corporate disputes, class actions, constitutional, Aboriginal
and administrative law issues.
Brasil, Luciana P. Branch MacMaster LLP
(604) 654-2960 lbrasil@branmac.com
Ms. Brasil is a partner at Branch MacMaster and the chair of its class action
practice. Originally from Brazil, she is dually qualified with civil and common
law degrees. She has practised almost exclusively in the area of class actions
for over 14 years acting for both plaintiffs and defendants across Canada,
and working with or against the vast majority of leading Canadian
class action counsel.
Boggs, C. Kirk Lerners LLP
(416) 601-2367 kboggs@lerners.ca
Mr. Boggs focuses on insurance defence, appellate advocacy, class actions
and health law. His insurance law experience involves extensive public entity
and police defence, professional negligence-legal, motor vehicle, property
damage, fraud, E&O (Directors' and Officers') and commercial liability
claims. He also provides coverage assistance in these areas.
Bodrug, John D. Davies Ward Phillips & Vineberg LLP
(416) 863-5576 jbodrug@dwpv.com
Mr. Bodrug's extensive experience in competition law includes price-fixing
investigations, mergers, and distribution and advertising matters. He advises
domestic and international clients in various industries, including resources,
transportation and financial services.
Boddez, Thomas M. Thorsteinssons LLP
(604) 602-4260 tmboddez@thor.ca
Mr. Boddez is a partner of Thorsteinssons LLP. He has served as the Managing
Partner, and also as a Governor of the Canadian Tax Foundation. He is a
member of the Thorsteinssons' tax litigation group and is regularly recognized
as one of Canada's leaders in the field of tax controversies.
LEXPERT-RANKED LAWYERS
e SCC overturned the BC Court of Ap-
peal's decision that had allowed judicial review
of the arbitrator's decision in Teal. e SCC re-
affirmed its 2014 decision in the case of Sattva
Capital v. Creston Moly, 2014 SCC 53, and nar-
rowed the standard of review. In so doing, the
high court further limited the rights of parties to
seek appeals of arbitral decisions.
Furthermore, the Teal decision has clarified
that, even when a court finds grounds of law to
grant review of an arbitral decision, the court
must apply the standard of reasonableness, rather
than correctness, which is the standard of review
in civil litigation appeals. e decisions of arbitra-
tors on issues of law therefore receive greater def-
erence from the courts.
Says Terry: "If the standard of review were, is
the arbitrator correct or not, you can only have a
binary answer. e reasonableness standard al-
lows a number of answers that might be reason-
able. You might not agree that the arbitrator got
it correct, but if you think it's reasonable you're
going to let the decision stand."
Luis Sarabia, a partner at Davies Ward Phillips
& Vineberg LLP in Toronto, says: "An arbitra-
tor's decision doesn't have to be right; it just has to
be reasonable. And the reason for that is that the
courts want to encourage arbitration. It's a way of
ensuring that the parties' initial objective of hav-
"[THE SCC] IS REAFFIRMING
THE MESSAGE THAT
IT AND VARIOUS COURTS
OF APPEAL HAVE SENT OUT
OVER THE PAST DECADE OR
MORE, THAT WHEN PARTIES
DECIDE TO ARBITRATE DISPUTES
AND THE ARBITRATOR MAKES
A DECISION, A GREAT DEAL
OF DEFERENCE IS TO BE
GIVEN BY THE COURT TO
THE ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL."
John Terry; Torys LLP
