Written By: Avery Cameron Reviewed By: Grace Murdoch Introduction While the court’s use of civil contempt proceedings sends a strong message, it is not always the most appropriate mechanism to ensure parties are abiding by their legal obligations. In the recent decision of Association of Architectural Technologists of Ontario v. Ontario Association of Architects,[1] the … Continued
Insights
& Commentary
Insights list
Reporting Isn’t Claiming: The Ontario Court of Appeal on Notice Requirements for Statutory Accident Benefits
Written By: Gary Cerriku Reviewed By: Douglas Treilhard In Jakupovic v. Intact Insurance Company, 2026 ONCA 651 (Jakupovic), the Ontario Court of Appeal clarified the notice requirement an insured must meet in order to claim Statutory Accident Benefits (“SABs”). Merely reporting a motor vehicle accident to an insurer is not notice of an intention to … Continued
by Douglas Treilhard
Holding Back on Holding in Contempt: The Ontario Court of Appeal on Civil Contempt Proceedings
Written By: Avery Cameron Reviewed By: Grace Murdoch Introduction While the court’s use of civil contempt proceedings sends a strong message, it is not always the most appropriate mechanism to ensure parties are abiding by their legal obligations. In the recent decision of Association of Architectural Technologists of Ontario v. Ontario Association of Architects,[1] the … Continued
by Grace Murdoch
The Consequences of Breaking the “Inflexible Rule”: The Court of Appeal Ruling in Chubb Insurance Company of Canada v. Zurich Insurance Company, 2026 ONCA 302 (CanLII)
Written by Jason Taggart Reviewed by Grant Ferguson Introduction The recent Ontario Court of Appeal decision, Chubb Insurance Company of Canada v. Zurich Insurance Company, [1] (“Chubb v. Zurich”) raises the risk of insurer’s paying accident benefits permanently if they do not comply with an increasingly “inflexible rule”. That rule: “pay now dispute later,” has … Continued
by Grant Ferguson
Ontario Court of Appeal Clarifies the Public Interest Threshold in Anti-SLAPP Motions
By: Danika Osborne Reviewed by: Katie Di Tomaso INTRODUCTION The Court of Appeal for Ontario (“ONCA”) in Rajic v. MacDonald, 2026 ONCA 288 clarified the interpretation of the “public interest” requirement under s. 137.1(3) of the Courts of Justice Act (“CJA”) in anti-SLAPP motions. The ONCA held that the motion judge applied a restrictive approach … Continued
Final or Interlocutory? The Court of Appeal Confirms the Distinction in the Context of the Defence of Civil Fraud
By Isha Sandhu Introduction In the recent decision of Natario v. RBC Insurance Company of Canada, the Court of Appeal for Ontario addressed whether an order denying two insurers leave to amend their Statement of Defence to plead the defence of civil fraud was final or interlocutory. In finding that the order was final, the … Continued
Ontario Court of Appeal Rules that Actions Against Barrick Gold Cannot Proceed in Ontario on the Basis of Forum Non Conveniens.
Written by Dimitris Logothetis Reviewed by Rovena Hajdëri INTRODUCTION In Matiko John v. Barrick Gold Corporation,[1] the Ontario Court of Appeal considered whether actions brought by Tanzanian individuals arising from alleged human rights abuses at a gold mine in Tanzania should proceed in Ontario or be stayed and heard in Tanzania. The Court dismissed the … Continued
by Rovena Hajdëri
The Supreme Court of Canada Unveils New Tort of Intimate Partner Violence in Ahluwalia v Ahluwalia, 2026 SCC 16
By Felisia Milana INTRODUCTION The Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) delivered its much-anticipated decision in Ahluwalia v Ahluwalia, 2026 SCC 16, where the Court was tasked with grappling whether a new tort of family violence should be recognized in Canada. Following from the teetering decisions of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (“ONSC”) and the Ontario Court … Continued
Expert Evidence as a Double-Edged Sword: The Court of Appeal Reaffirms Trial Judges’ Gatekeeper Role
Written by Caroline Swiderski Reviewed by Linette King Introduction In Pederson v Forget,[1] the Court of Appeal for Ontario upheld a trial judge’s decision to exclude expert evidence he found to be unreliable. In doing so, the Court reaffirmed the importance of the trial judge’s role as a gatekeeper and the deference that it attracts. … Continued
by Private: Linette King