Northstar/ Baker Order: Government doesn't have to explain its case
The Environmental Review Tribunal has ruled that the Director, Ministry of the Environment, doesn’t have to specify its basis for imposing personal liability, by order, on the former directors and officers of two Northstar companies (Baker v. Director), at least not now. Despite uncontradicted evidence that the individuals affected cannot understand what, if anything, they...
Continue reading the post titled Northstar/ Baker Order: Government doesn't have to explain its caseNo appeal from Environmental Review Tribunal refusal of stay pending appeal
She ruled that the Legislature intended orderees to have no remedy if the Tribunal turns down their request for a stay pending appeal, regardless of the financial consequences and of the potential invalidity of the Order.
Continue reading the post titled No appeal from Environmental Review Tribunal refusal of stay pending appealNo stay for Order to former officers and directors
The Environmental Review Tribunal has refused to stay a multimillion dollar order to the former officers and directors of a bankrupt company and its parent, pending appeal, whether or not the Ministry of the Environment had jurisdiction to issue the Order.
Continue reading the post titled No stay for Order to former officers and directorsEnvironmental Review Tribunal confirms high evidentiary burden to be removed from an Environmental Protection Act, Section 18 Directorβs Order
A July 2, 2019, judgment of the Environmental Review Tribunal in Alizadeh v. Ontario (Environment, Conservation and Parks), 2019 CanLII 62106 (ON ERT), confirms that corporate officers and directors face a high evidentiary burden to rebut the presumption that they are properly named in an Environmental Protection Act (βEPAβ), Section 18 Order. Section 18 of...
Continue reading the post titled Environmental Review Tribunal confirms high evidentiary burden to be removed from an Environmental Protection Act, Section 18 Directorβs OrderBlood Thinners – Pradaxa
Siskinds is not pursuing any further litigation with respect to this medication. Pradaxa (dabigatran etexilate) is an anti-coagulant (blood thinner) manufactured by Boehringer Ingelheim and approved for use in Canada. Pradaxa is prescribed to treat or prevent conditions such as deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, as well as atrial fibrillation and sometimes following certain surgeries,...
Continue reading the post titled Blood Thinners – PradaxaVolkswagen
This class action alleges that certain Volkswagen and Audi diesel-powered automobiles contain a software device that detects when these cars are undergoing emissions testing and triggers activation of the carsβ full emissions control systems. In ordinary driving conditions, these cars emit 10 to 40 times more than the allowable legal levels of certain pollutants. This...
Continue reading the post titled VolkswagenBetterHelp
Siskinds has filed two proposed privacy class actions against BetterHelp, Inc. (βBetterHelpβ) in Ontario and British Columbia. These proposed class actions arise from the plaintiffsβ allegations that there was improper and unauthorized disclosure of intimate personal health information, which BetterHelp collected from consumers through its provision of mental health services, despite its assurances that it...
Continue reading the post titled BetterHelpCathay Forest Products Corp.
Settlement Notice: The deadline for applying to receive settlement benefits has passed and all settlement funds have been distributed. On June 9, 2011, Siskinds LLP, representing a retail investor of Cathay Forest Products Corp (βCathayβ, former TSX-V symbol:CFZ; CUSIP Number: 14915N), filed a proposed class action in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (βCourtβ) against...
Continue reading the post titled Cathay Forest Products Corp.Molson Coors Brewing Company
In October 2005, Siskinds commenced a class proceeding in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice relating to the so-called “merger of equals” between Molson Inc. and Adolph Coors Company. The Statement of Claim names as defendants the company that resulted from the “merger” — Molson Coors Brewing Company — as well as current and former...
Continue reading the post titled Molson Coors Brewing CompanyImax Corporation
In September 2006, Siskinds LLP filed a class proceeding against IMAX Corporation (βIMAXβ) and certain of its directors and officers (the βOntario Class Actionβ). The action concerns IMAXβs revenue recognition practices for the 2005 fiscal year. The statement of claim alleges that IMAX and certain of its directors and officers overstated IMAXβs revenues for 2005,...
Continue reading the post titled Imax CorporationReceive Blog Posts
By subscribing to our blog, you will receive an email when a new post is added. You can unsubscribe at any time by sending an email to us at [email protected] with the word βunsubscribeβ in the subject line.