Class Actions In Canada: Hot Topics Shaping Tech Litigation (Video)

This weekly summary provides comprehensive analysis of civil law decisions from the Ontario Court of Appeal for August 31 to September 4, 2026. The featured cases examine critical issues including distribution orders in investment fraud cases, purchase money resulting trusts, and the enforceability of temporary lay-off clauses in employment agreements.

Many people delay taking legal action after an assault because of trauma, fear, ongoing criminal proceedings, or simply not knowing their legal rights. Understanding the limitation period for assault claims in British Columbia is essential if you’re considering seeking compensation through a civil lawsuit

An Ontario court ruled that arbitration agreements containing "final and binding" language may prevent parties from appealing legal errors made by arbitrators. The decision examines how a $3 million construction dispute was resolved through arbitration, and why the losing party could not challenge the arbitrator's legal mistakes despite their significant financial impact.

The recent breakdown of Canada-US trade talks and the tariff measures that followed have prompted Canadian businesses to reassess how they manage cross-border trade. While higher costs may be the most immediate concern, the broader challenge is the unpredictability that cannot be treated as a temporary anomaly.

Sexual assault survivors in Alberta face no time limits when seeking civil compensation, regardless of whether the abuse occurred recently or decades ago. Understanding your legal rights and available remedies can provide a path toward justice and healing, even when criminal proceedings aren't pursued or don't result in charges.

A U.S. appeals court has unanimously overturned certification of a securities class action against Boeing, establishing that plaintiffs must demonstrate a workable, class-wide damages methodology at the certification stage. This decision reinforces heightened standards for class certification that parallel evolving requirements in Canadian securities litigation, where courts increasingly demand concrete evidence and specific liability theories before approving class actions.

A mutual fund dealing representative sued the MFDA and OSC for $47.5 million in damages, alleging intentional torts including conspiracy, abuse of process, and malicious prosecution stemming from a regulatory investigation and enforcement proceedings. The 21-day trial resulted in complete dismissal of all claims, with the court making significant findings on regulatory immunity provisions and the scope of duties owed by securities regulators to regulated persons.

In-house counsel face critical decisions at the outset of internal investigations that determine the credibility and defensibility of the entire process. This guide examines the strategic questions around scope, privilege protection, external support, and documentation that must be addressed early—often under pressure and before the facts are fully known.

For many people in Ontario family court, the first case conference can feel uncertain. You may wonder whether anything meaningful can happen at this early stage, especially if disclosure is missing, support is needed, or temporary arrangements are required. While a case conference is not a trial, it can still be an important step in getting the case organized and moving forward.

The Supreme Court of Canada has delivered a landmark ruling declaring section 66 of the Conflict of Interest Act unconstitutional, fundamentally reshaping the boundaries between legislative authority and judicial oversight of administrative decisions. This unanimous decision addresses longstanding questions about the validity of privative clauses that restrict courts' ability to review findings by Parliament's ethics commissioner.

‘Interest’ is deductible in terms of section 24J(2) of the Income Tax Act. The term ‘interest’ is defined to include any interest ‘or similar finance charges’. The meaning of ‘similar finance charges’ has been uncertain since the 2016 amendment replaced the broader expression ‘related finance charges’ with ‘similar finance charges’. Under the previous wording, the SCA held in CSARS v South African Custodial Services that various costs closely connected to obtaining finance, including guarantee, advisory, margin, commitment, legal and administration fees, qualified as ‘related finance charges’.

Effective September 8, 2026, Canada implemented retaliatory tariffs on certain U.S. goods in response to the initial 50% tariffs imposed by the US under Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930. To operationalize these measures, the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) issued Customs Notice 26-23, establishing binding administrative rules on how the surtax will be applied, calculated, and collected.

The recent breakdown of Canada-US trade talks and the tariff measures that followed have prompted Canadian businesses to reassess how they manage cross-border trade. While higher costs may be the most immediate concern, the broader challenge is the unpredictability that cannot be treated as a temporary anomaly.

Private corporations governed by the Canada Business Corporations Act (the “CBCA”) should ensure that their register of individuals with significant control (an “ISC Register”) is complete, accurate and up to date. Corporations Canada has begun issuing official inquiries to certain CBCA corporations in connection with their ISC Register filings, particularly where a corporation has reported that it has no individuals with significant control (“ISCs”).

With Labour Day now behind us, Parliament Hill is gearing up for its September 21 return. Canada’s counter-tariffs on nearly $28 billion in American goods are now in force, and the United States has already escalated in response: President Trump has signed measures to ban certain Canadian alcohol, dairy-related products, molasses, non-alcoholic beer, motorcycles and mopeds from entering the U.S. market as of September 29, while modifying the list of Canadian goods subject to 50% tariffs effective September 15 and directing action to remove Canadian-origin products from U.S. government procurement schedules.

On July 15, 2026, the Competition Bureau (the “Bureau”) released its proposed Cartel Enforcement Guidelines (the “Guidelines”) for public consultation. The Guidelines, intended to improve transparency and predictability, provide the Bureau's updated enforcement framework for sections 45 to 49 of the Competition Act (the “Act”), consolidating and modernizing guidance previously contained in the Bureau's Competitor Collaboration Guidelines and Enforcement Guidelines on wage-fixing and no-poaching agreements.

The Government of Alberta has reportedly become the first jurisdiction in Canada to use artificial intelligence (“AI”) in the initial drafting of the Alberta Whisky Act (the “Whisky Act”). The Whisky Act, which came into effect on May 21, 2026, establishes new standards and definitions for what qualifies as “Alberta Whisky”, including requirements relating to production standards, ingredients, and processes. According to the province, AI was used as part of the drafting process, with government officials and legislative counsel retaining responsibility for review, revision, and all levels of approval.

The Ontario Court of Appeal recently released its decision in Wigdor v. Facebook Canada Ltd., addressing two significant issues for Ontario employers: the enforceability of termination clauses that purport to limit an employee's entitlements, and the application of the Employment Standards Act, 2000 (ESA) to equity-based compensation documents such as Restricted Stock Unit (RSU) agreements.

On June 20, 2025, the Supreme Court of British Columbia released its decision in Lorval Developments Ltd. v. Langley (Township), 2025 BCSC 1148, setting aside the Township of Langley’s Community Amenity Contributions Policy (the “Policy”) on the basis that it amounted to a mandatory amenity payment regime without statutory authority. For local governments, developers, and landowners, this decision is significant because it confirms that municipalities cannot require community amenity contributions ("CACs") as a condition of rezoning unless expressly authorized by statute

A regulatory shift now under consideration in Ontario could reshape how the province’s medical aesthetic clinics operate. The proposal, which would change how nurses are authorized to administer medical aesthetic services, invites a broader look at how Ontario currently regulates cosmetic injections and how the proposed changes would align the province more closely with the regulatory frameworks already in place elsewhere in Canada. While these procedures are often marketed as routine “spa” services, they remain medical acts that involve prescription products and carry clinical risks.