Stay informed with the latest insights and updates

Following are our summaries of the civil decisions of the Court of Appeal for Ontario from January 12, 2026 to January 16, 2026.

Subsection 247(2.1) establishes that transfer pricing rules take precedence over other tax provisions when determining transactions for Canadian corporations with related non-residents. This subsection outlines three ordering rules, introduced in Budget 2019 and legislated under Bill C-30 – these rules can be pertinent to Canadian technology firms participating in Scientific Research and Experimental Development (“SR&ED”) initiatives, particularly when a related non-resident company is involved. This article addresses potential uncertainties associated with applying these ordering rules when calculating ITCs – and subsequent sale/disposition of a developed asset via SR&ED activities.

Tax disputes follow many stages and phases. Each phase of a tax dispute from CRA audit and appeals to appealing to the Tax Court of Canada includes different practical and qualitative considerations for taxpayers. Where a taxpayer disagrees with positions and processes while at the CRA audit and appeals steps, the Tax Court of Canada offers an important check on the application of tax law. In addition to more robust rules and procedures at the Tax Court of Canada, judicial oversight can help ensure a fairer process for taxpayers when compared to the Taxpayer Bill of Rights. Adding the perspective of Department of Justice lawyers when appealing to the Tax Court of Canada can also facilitate settlement by providing a new risk assessment for the Minister.

In its 2025 Federal Budget, the Department of Finance Canada proposed certain amendments to the Income Tax Act (Canada) that are intended to simplify the qualified investment regime for registered plans. This article provides a short overview and discussion of the proposed changes.

Astle v. The King, 2025 TCC 105 (Informal Procedure), is a recent decision from the Tax Court of Canada taking up a former company director’s liability for unremitted payroll source deductions. The Tax Court dismissed the taxpayer’s appeal, finding that the taxpayer had been validly assessed by the Canada Revenue Agency within two years after the taxpayer had last ceased to be a director of the corporation. The Tax Court also concluded that the taxpayer had not established due diligence to prevent the failure to remit. While the Tax Court’s decision in this case may be understandable on its facts, the Court has continued to adopt statements from prior authorities that, respectfully, extend the reach of tax legislation beyond an appropriate construction of its text, particularly in light of the need to resort to provincial corporate law to determine when a director has resigned. That provincial authority can, and should, determine when a director has validly resigned in accordance with the prevailing body of corporate law.

When it comes to protecting intellectual property in franchising, trademarks tend to dominate the conversation, largely because the franchise system’s name and logo are often the key drivers of brand recognition and success. However, one of the assets in franchised businesses that is often overlooked are copyrighted materials.

This article explores the key aspects of a common employer finding and outlines the potential pitfalls and mitigation strategies for franchisors seeking to evaluate their own internal practices and protect their business. Ultimately, there are ways to avoid a finding of common employer status, but doing so typically requires franchisors to forego at least some level of operational control. This is not an easy decision, as franchisors must balance the need to control certain employment practices to maintain brand consistency against the risk of being deemed a common employer.  This is a highly individualized balancing act and should be assessed within the context of each franchisor’s unique model.

Ontario has implemented significant amendments to the Construction Act and its regulations effective January 1, 2026, aimed at accelerating cash flow, clarifying rights, and refining adjudication and trust mechanisms across the construction pyramid. This article condenses the principal changes and their practical consequences for construction practitioners in Ontario.

The Canadian Construction Documents Committee (CCDC) recently issued updates to four of its standard form contracts. This article focuses on changes to the following three contracts:

• CCDC 5A – Construction Management Contract – For Services;
• CCDC 5B – Construction Management Contract for Services and Construction; and
• CCDC 17 – Stipulated Price Contract Between Owner and Trade Contractor for Construction Management Projects (collectively, the “2025 CM Contracts”).

On June 16, 2025, new Rule 49.14 of the Rules of Civil Procedure came into force. The rule codifies a line of case law which imposed significant consequences on parties who failed to disclose partial settlements. This article reviews the requirements of the new rule and provides practical guidance for practitioners navigating the transition.

Picture this – you are subcontractor who has been contracted to build, weld, and otherwise complete the structural steel component of a commercial building. Your team finishes the welding – only to realize afterward that none of the workers were certified by the Canadian Welding Bureau (“CWB”), nor were they supervised by someone who was. You submit your invoice to the general contractor or the owner, but payment is refused due to "deficiencies." Can you still enforce your right to payment? According to the common law in Ontario, the short answer is unlikely.

On April 17, 2025, Earth Boring Co. Limited (EBCL) sought protection under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (the CCAA). Among the provisions of the court’s initial order was a temporary stay preventing claims being made on certain performance bonds. This temporary stay led some in the construction industry to question the value of performance bonds during an insolvency. The outcome of the EBCL case, however, demonstrates the objectives of the CCAA process can be achieved without prejudicing the rights of project owners who want to ensure that their bonded contracts are completed.

Following are our summaries of the civil decisions of the Court of Appeal for Ontario from December 31, 2025 to January 9, 2026

In this personal reflection, Dr. Ningjing (Natalie) Zhang shares a New Year’s resolution that reshaped how she practices law, leads her firm, and lives her life: learning to be her own best friend. Drawing from her experiences as a refugee-turned-lawyer, single mother, and first-time law firm owner, she reflects on how relentless self-criticism, though often mistaken for discipline, can quietly erode resilience. Through moments of parenting challenges, professional mistakes, and emotional reckoning, she argues that self-compassion is not indulgence but essential maintenance—especially for women lawyers navigating demanding careers.

Starting a law firm in Ontario is both challenging and rewarding, requiring lawyers to make numerous strategic and operational decisions. New practitioners may choose from various business models, including fully independent practices, agency arrangements, or freelance rosters. Establishing a successful firm demands a solid business plan, careful budgeting for start-up costs, and access to essential resources such as practice management software and professional insurance. Lawyers must also meet Law Society of Ontario compliance requirements, including a mandatory practice essentials course beginning in 2025. As client development skills are rarely taught in law school, networking and marketing are critical. The Ontario Bar Association’s Solo and Small Firm Section consolidates key guidance, practical tools, and wellness resources into a single, accessible reference.

From Risk to Resilience: Cybersecurity for Legal Practices provides a practical and comprehensive cybersecurity framework for solo practitioners and small law firms. It explains why legal practices are prime targets for cybercrime and outlines common and emerging threats, including phishing, ransomware, business email compromise, and AI-enabled attacks. The report emphasizes compliance with Law Society of Ontario obligations and PIPEDA, highlights high-risk practice areas, and sets out actionable daily security measures. It includes a clear incident response plan for the first 60 minutes following a breach and offers guidance on engaging cybersecurity professionals and selecting cyber insurance. Overall, the report frames cybersecurity as an essential component of competent, ethical, and resilient legal practice.

Kathleen Robichaud emphasizes that email is a powerful but imperfect communication tool for lawyers and should be used thoughtfully and professionally. She highlights the importance of deciding whether a reply is necessary, replying only to appropriate recipients, and avoiding accidental disclosures through careless use of “Reply All” or auto-fill. Lawyers should read emails in full, keep message chains concise, and use clear, updated subject lines. Tone and formality matter, as email remains a formal communication in legal practice. Robichaud also cautions that email is insecure and unreliable, making it unsuitable for sensitive information, and stresses the value of organizing email effectively to enhance efficiency and communication quality.

Since the last amendments to the Divorce Act came into effect in March 2021, family law in Canada has continued to evolve in response to family violence. Those amendments expanded the definition of family violence, addressed its impact on children, and updated relocation provisions, including the ability to waive notice in cases of violence. Nearly five years later, Bill C-223 (Keeping Children Safe Act) builds on these reforms by strengthening protections for children and survivors, emphasizing risk assessment, child‑focused decision‑making, and a trauma‑informed approach in family law proceedings.

The modern legal client increasingly comes armed with their own AI-generated research, presenting novel challenges for lawyers. Debating a ‘machine’ that produces opinions with authority and rapidity but without legal skill or judgement, can not only cost lawyers time and erode trust, but create liability exposure. Allan Ritchie offers advice for responding with restraint to AI-fueled ‘findings’ while redirecting the conversation to the real-world decisions the client needs to make.

Recent updates in Ontario and Federal pension legislation, regulatory policy, taxation and caselaw, including overcontributions, automatic OAS enrollment, climate-related financial risks, and more.

Impaired driving and dangerous driving are both illegal and equally serious criminal offences. They are technically rather different when it comes to the Crown proving their elements in court and for counsel defending the accused. Notably, consumption of alcohol, short of the point of impairment, is not the element of the offence of dangerous operation. However, it is “a relevant factor for the trier of fact in considering the mens rea element of the offence of dangerous driving:" R. v. McLennan, 2016 ONCA 732, at para. 27.

The Ontario Court of Appeal upheld an auto-insurer’s denial of coverage to a mother-daughter duo who turned a motor vehicle accident into a case of civil fraud. The Court in Wong v Aviva insurance Company of Canada, 2024 ONCA 874 upheld the lower court’s analysis of Hryniak v Mauldin, 2014 SCC 7, to determine that lying to your insurer about the driver of the vehicle involved in an accident can constitute civil fraud.

In September 2025, the music industry headlines were dominated not by a pop star or a rock band, but by Xania Monet, a virtual R&B artist created using the AI platform Suno. Reports from Billboard and Forbes confirmed that the human creator behind the project, Telisha “Nikki” Jones, signed a record deal with Hallwood Media worth up to $3 million. For entertainment lawyers, the headline is flashy, but the legal reality is a headache. If a human creator contributes lyrics and prompts, but an AI generates the melody, harmony, and vocal performance, what “economic rights” actually exist to support a multi-million dollar transaction?

Following are our summaries of the civil decisions of the Court of Appeal for Ontario for the week of December 8, 2025.