<?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</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/tag/securities/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>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>Whose book of business is it, anyway?</title>
		<link>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2008/01/25/whose-book-of-business-is-it-anyway/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2008/01/25/whose-book-of-business-is-it-anyway/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jan 2008 03:13:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kenneth Dekker</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Commercial Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[adviser]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[book of  business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[broker]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[confidentiality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dealer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dismissal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[investment firm]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ontario Superior Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[securities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[solicitation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelitigator.ca/?p=166</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p style="margin-top: 0px">There are few, if any, legal issues affecting the investment industry that are more cloudy and less certain than whether investment firm clients belong to the investment advisor or to the investment firm. And there are arguably few issues more&#8230;</p>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2008/01/25/whose-book-of-business-is-it-anyway/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Whose book of business is it, anyway? Confusion reigns on &#8216;ownership&#8217; of investment firm client lists</title>
		<link>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2007/11/22/whose-book-of-business-is-it-anyway-confusion-reigns-on-ownership-of-investment-firm-client-lists/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2007/11/22/whose-book-of-business-is-it-anyway-confusion-reigns-on-ownership-of-investment-firm-client-lists/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Nov 2007 21:10:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kenneth Dekker</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Commercial Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Employment Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[advisor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[assets]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BMO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[book of  business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[broker]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brokerage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[client]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[clients]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[competition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[consultant]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[customer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[damages]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[departing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dismissal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[firm]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Inglis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[investment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[King]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Merrill Lynch]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nesbitt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ontario Superior Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[retirement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sale]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[securities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[solicitation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TD]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelitigator.ca/?p=211</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There are few, if any, legal issues affecting the investment industry that are more cloudy and less certain than whether investment firm clients belong to the investment advisor or to the investment firm. And there are arguably few issues more important. This question has been the subject of several widely divergent – and even confusing - court decisions on the issue over the past few years. ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2007/11/22/whose-book-of-business-is-it-anyway-confusion-reigns-on-ownership-of-investment-firm-client-lists/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>Ontario&#8217;s top court overturns securities class action judgment against Danier Leather</title>
		<link>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2005/12/15/ontarios-top-court-overturns-securities-class-action-judgment-against-danier-leather/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2005/12/15/ontarios-top-court-overturns-securities-class-action-judgment-against-danier-leather/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Dec 2005 21:13:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kenneth Dekker</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Commercial Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Securities Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Class Actions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[damages]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Frauds, Misrepresentation, Deceit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[initial public offering]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ontario securities commission]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[prospectus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[public companies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[securities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[securities act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[statutory interpretation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stock market]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelitigator.ca/?p=213</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In a unanimous decision written by Laskin JA and released late yesterday, the Ontario Court of Appeal overturned Canada’s first-ever class action judgment in favour of investors arising from misrepresentations by a corporation prior to its initial public offering ("IPO").]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2005/12/15/ontarios-top-court-overturns-securities-class-action-judgment-against-danier-leather/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
