<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Litigator - Affleck Greene McMurtry, LLP &#187; Securities Litigation</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/category/commercial-litigation/securities-litigation/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.thelitigator.ca</link>
	<description>Competition Law and Commercial Litigation Updates</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Aug 2010 16:24:52 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>The IMAX Case: Superior Court certifies first-ever Ontario shareholder class action for misrepresentations on the secondary market</title>
		<link>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2010/02/05/the-imax-case-superior-court-certifies-first-ever-ontario-shareholder-class-action-for-misrepresentations-on-the-secondary-market/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2010/02/05/the-imax-case-superior-court-certifies-first-ever-ontario-shareholder-class-action-for-misrepresentations-on-the-secondary-market/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2010 16:29:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David N. Vaillancourt</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Class Actions and Other Private Actions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Commercial Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Securities Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[139.3]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[accountants]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[accounting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[audit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[auditors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[class action]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[directors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[disclosure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[films]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[financial statements]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GAAP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IMAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[misrepresentation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[movies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[officers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[public]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reliance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[revenue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[secondary market]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[securities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[securities act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[shareholders]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[shares]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Silver]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stocks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[theatres]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[van Rensburg]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelitigator.ca/?p=580</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In a pair of decisions released the same day, Justice Katherine van Rensburg of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice became the first judge to consider the statutory remedy created under section 138.3 of the Ontario Securities Act (the “Act”) for shareholders of public companies who suffer damages from public company misrepresentations on the secondary securities market in documents such as annual financial statements and other public documents.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2010/02/05/the-imax-case-superior-court-certifies-first-ever-ontario-shareholder-class-action-for-misrepresentations-on-the-secondary-market/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Statements to Securities Commission are protected by absolute privilege</title>
		<link>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2009/12/02/statements-to-securities-commission-are-protected-by-absolute-privilege/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2009/12/02/statements-to-securities-commission-are-protected-by-absolute-privilege/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Dec 2009 05:06:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kenneth Dekker</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Attacks on Reputation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Commercial Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Securities Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[absolute privilege]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[advisor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[commission]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[defamatory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[disciplinary proceedings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[evidence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fraleigh]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IDA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IIROC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[investment dealer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[libel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MFDA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mutual fund dealer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Newbould]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ontario]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OSC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[qualified privilege]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[quasi-judicial]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RBC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regulator]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[salesperson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[securities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[slander]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Superior Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[testify]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[testimony]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[uniform termination notice]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelitigator.ca/?p=515</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ In his decision this Fall in Fraleigh v. RBC Dominion Securities, Ontario Superior Court Justice Newbould summarily dismissed an action brought by John Fraleigh against RBC Dominion Securities and one of its employees. The action was brought for allegedly false statements and testimony given before the Ontario Securities Commission claiming unusual trading activity in his RBC trading accounts – information that was later published in media reports. In dismissing Fraleigh’s action, Justice Newbould found that the claim arose entirely from testimony and other related communications to the OSC; communications that are protected by absolute privilege.
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2009/12/02/statements-to-securities-commission-are-protected-by-absolute-privilege/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Investment industry practice can be considered in determining whether contract is formed, Court of Appeal rules</title>
		<link>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2009/10/08/investment-industry-practice-can-be-considered-in-determining-whether-contract-is-formed-court-of-appeal-rules/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2009/10/08/investment-industry-practice-can-be-considered-in-determining-whether-contract-is-formed-court-of-appeal-rules/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2009 14:28:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Christian Farahat</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Commercial Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Securities Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Montreal Stock Exchange]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ontario court of appeal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sands Brothers Canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[securities industry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UBS Securities Canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[verbal agreements]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelitigator.ca/?p=494</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In its decision earlier this year in UBS Securities Canada, Inc. v. Sands Brothers Canada, Ltd., the Ontario Court of Appeal examined the extent to which industry custom and common practice may be utilized in determining whether a contract has been formed between two parties. In particular, the investment industry practice of conducting multi-million dollar deals over the telephone was cited by the Court in finding that a binding agreement for the purchase and sale of shares had been concluded between the parties to this litigation and in ordering specific performance of that agreement.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2009/10/08/investment-industry-practice-can-be-considered-in-determining-whether-contract-is-formed-court-of-appeal-rules/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Court of Appeal re-establishes IDA’s right to discipline former members</title>
		<link>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2009/09/16/court-of-appeal-re-establishes-ida%e2%80%99s-right-to-discipline-former-members/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2009/09/16/court-of-appeal-re-establishes-ida%e2%80%99s-right-to-discipline-former-members/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Sep 2009 20:43:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David N. Vaillancourt</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Commercial Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Securities Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IDA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ontario court of appeal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[securities act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stephen Taub]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Taub v. Investment Dealers Association of Canada]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelitigator.ca/?p=486</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Ontario Court of Appeal has restored an earlier Ontario Securities Commission ruling, which held that the Investment Dealers Association of Canada (now known as the Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada, or IIROC) retains the authority to discipline a former member for up to five years after that member has left the organization.  The ruling also opens the door to IIROC and other SROs levying court-enforceable fines against former members.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2009/09/16/court-of-appeal-re-establishes-ida%e2%80%99s-right-to-discipline-former-members/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Canada’s top court nixes challenge to ABCP restructuring</title>
		<link>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2008/11/26/canadas-top-court-nixes-challenge-to-abcp-restructuring/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2008/11/26/canadas-top-court-nixes-challenge-to-abcp-restructuring/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Nov 2008 02:53:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kenneth Dekker</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Commercial Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Securities Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ABCP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[asset]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[banks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bond]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CCAA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Colin Campbell]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[commercial]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Companies Creditors Arrangement Act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[creditors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[crisis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[financial]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jean Coutu Group]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[liquidity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mansfield]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Metcalfe]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[paper]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[plan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Purdy Crawford]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[restructured]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[restructuring]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[secured]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[securities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelitigator.ca/index2.php/?p=105</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On September 19, 2008, the Supreme Court of Canada refused leave to appeal the approval of an all-encompassing restructuring plan for the Canadian market in Asset-Backed Commercial Paper and put an end to all legal challenges relating to what is now appearing to be merely the first Canadian chapter in a financial crisis that has since swept the globe.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2008/11/26/canadas-top-court-nixes-challenge-to-abcp-restructuring/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Former member escapes the IDA&#8217;s grasp</title>
		<link>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2008/11/21/former-member-escapes-the-idas-grasp/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2008/11/21/former-member-escapes-the-idas-grasp/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 21:09:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Sandra Monardo</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Commercial Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Securities Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[administrative]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[commission]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[discipline]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IDA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IIROC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Investment Dealers Association]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[investments]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[member]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ontario securities commission]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OSC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regulatory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[securities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[securities act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Taub]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelitigator.ca/index2.php/?p=58</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In its recent decision in <em>Taub v. Investment Dealers Association of Canada</em>, Ontario’s Divisional Court reined in an attempt by the Investment Dealers Association of Canada (now known as the Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada, or IIROC) to discipline a former investment advisor, despite the fact that he had not been an IDA member for more than a year. ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2008/11/21/former-member-escapes-the-idas-grasp/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Ontario Securities Commission panel decisions criticize regulators’ disclosure practices</title>
		<link>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2008/11/11/ontario-securities-commission-panel-decisions-criticize-regulators-disclosure-practices/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2008/11/11/ontario-securities-commission-panel-decisions-criticize-regulators-disclosure-practices/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Nov 2008 02:33:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kenneth Dekker</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Commercial Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Securities Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Berry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Capital]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[commission]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[disciplinary proceeding]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[discipline]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[disclosure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[document]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[documentary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IIROC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ontario]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ontario securities commission]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OSC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[panel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[production]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation Services]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regulatory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regulatory organization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scotia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[securities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[settlement discussions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stinchcombe]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelitigator.ca/index2.php/?p=96</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Two recent OSC decisions have sided against securities regulators on issues of documentary disclosure. In one case, an OSC panel found that there had been too much disclosure by OSC staff and, in another case, there had not been enough disclosure.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2008/11/11/ontario-securities-commission-panel-decisions-criticize-regulators-disclosure-practices/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>OSC clarifies when merger negotiations must be disclosed</title>
		<link>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2008/03/10/osc-clarifies-when-merger-negotiations-must-be-disclosed/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2008/03/10/osc-clarifies-when-merger-negotiations-must-be-disclosed/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Mar 2008 23:29:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Hooman Zargarzadeh</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Commercial Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Securities Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[3M]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ait]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Danier Leather]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[disclosure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[merger deal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[merger negotiations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ontario securities commission]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[supreme court of canada]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelitigator.ca/?p=314</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Companies do not have to disclose merger negotiations as a material change until there is sufficient likelihood that the deal will close, the Ontario Securities Commission held recently in Re AiT Advanced Information Technologies Corp.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2008/03/10/osc-clarifies-when-merger-negotiations-must-be-disclosed/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Canada’s top court dismisses shareholder class action against Danier Leather but rejects Business Judgment Rule as a defence in securities cases</title>
		<link>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2007/10/17/canada%e2%80%99s-top-court-dismisses-shareholder-class-action-against-danier-leather-but-rejects-business-judgment-rule-as-a-defence-in-securities-cases/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2007/10/17/canada%e2%80%99s-top-court-dismisses-shareholder-class-action-against-danier-leather-but-rejects-business-judgment-rule-as-a-defence-in-securities-cases/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Oct 2007 21:09:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kenneth Dekker</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Commercial Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Securities Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Binnie]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[broker]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[business judgment rule]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[class action]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[corporation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[costs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[deference]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[disclosure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[economic performance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[equities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[forecasts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[initial public offering]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[investment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[laskin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lederman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legislation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[management decisions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[material changes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[material facts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[misrepresentation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[prospectus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reasonableness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[s.130]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[securities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[securities act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[shareholders]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[shares]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[statutory interpretation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[supreme court of canada]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelitigator.ca/?p=209</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Canada’s Supreme Court upheld the dismissal of Canada’s first-ever securities class action judgment in favour of investors relating to alleged misrepresentations on an initial public offering.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2007/10/17/canada%e2%80%99s-top-court-dismisses-shareholder-class-action-against-danier-leather-but-rejects-business-judgment-rule-as-a-defence-in-securities-cases/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Lenders not liable for failing funds</title>
		<link>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2006/11/19/lenders-not-liable-for-failing-funds/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2006/11/19/lenders-not-liable-for-failing-funds/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 Nov 2006 19:09:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kyle Peterson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Banking Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Commercial Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Securities Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[advisor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[banks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[broker]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brokerage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[creditors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fiduciary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IDA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[investment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lenders]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[margin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OSC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[registered representative]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regulatory requirements]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[undermargin]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelitigator.ca/?p=282</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If investors borrow money to invest in mutual funds, and the funds do not perform up to expectations, are the lending financial institutions on the hook? This question was the subject of the recent Court of Appeal decision in Baldwin et al. v. Daubrey et al.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2006/11/19/lenders-not-liable-for-failing-funds/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
