Today
Today

Pension Plan Taxation in Canada: Easing the Tax Burden

  • October 04, 2016
  • Hennadiy Kutsenko

Over the course of the next 20 years, nearly 7 million Canadians will retire, a considerable portion with the benefit of a pension plan; some with defined benefit plans, others with annuities purchased with the funds they receive from a defined contribution plan. The sustainability of those plans, however, faces an uncertain future, as exemplified by the bankruptcy or insolvency proceedings concerning Indalex, Nortel and most recently, for the second time, U.S. Steel Canada (previously Stelco).

Taxation Law

Review of the Treaty Alliance Against Tar Sands Expansion

  • October 04, 2016
  • Nicole McDonald

A landmark treaty was signed on September 22, 2016, by at least fifty First Nations and tribes in Canada and the United States entitled the Treaty Alliance Against Tar Sands Expansion (the “Treaty”). The Treaty is regarded as a shift among Indigenous nations towards a more coordinated approach to oppose pipeline proposals in Canada and the Northern United States.

Unreasonable Delay and Environmental Prosecutions

  • October 03, 2016
  • Julie Abouchar and Anand Srivastava

The right to be tried within a reasonable time is a constitutionally protected right under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The SCC recently set an upper limit of 18 months as the presumed ceiling for a reasonable time to trial.

Environmental Law

Former Counsel Escapes Damages Award When New Counsel Fails to Start Claim on Time

  • October 03, 2016
  • Paula Boutis

Paula summarizes the recent Superior Court decision in Dobara Properties Limited et al. v. Arnone et al., 2016 ONSC 3599 in which self-represented plaintiffs were able to recover remediation costs from their former litigation counsel who missed a limitation period to recover same from the plaintiffs' former real estate counsel.

Environmental Law
<em>A.P. v. Aviva Canada</em>: To Infer or Not to Infer MIG?

A.P. v. Aviva Canada: To Infer or Not to Infer MIG?

  • October 03, 2016
  • Sheryl Patel

This decision highlights the importance of lawyers reviewing the medical records and the medical-legal reports generated during the Applicant’s file, and whether these documents are clear as to why the Applicant is either within or outside the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG). The adjudicator decided that the LAT will not infer information that is not clearly expressed in the medical evidence especially when compelling evidence is required to be discharged from the MIG.

Insurance Law
<em>Ledcor Construction Ltd v Northbridge Indemnity Insurance Co: Case Comment</em>

Ledcor Construction Ltd v Northbridge Indemnity Insurance Co: Case Comment

  • October 03, 2016
  • Belinda Bain, Derrick Pagenkopf and Oliver FitzGerald

In Ledcor Construction Ltd v Northbridge Indemnity Insurance Co the SCC applied the "faulty workmanship" exclusion in a Builders' Risk policy. The Court held that the exclusion does not preclude coverage "merely because the damage results to that part of the project on which the contractor was working." The decision also establishes that insurance contracts need to be interpreted consistently because they are standard form contracts.

Insurance Law