<?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; Ontario</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.thelitigator.ca/tag/ontario/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.thelitigator.ca</link>
	<description>Competition Law and Commercial Litigation Updates</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 15:37:15 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Court of Appeal reconsiders test for jurisdiction over foreign defendants</title>
		<link>http://www.thelitigator.ca/2010/04/court-of-appeal-reconsiders-test-for-jurisdiction-over-foreign-defendants/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thelitigator.ca/2010/04/court-of-appeal-reconsiders-test-for-jurisdiction-over-foreign-defendants/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Apr 2010 01:38:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David N. Vaillancourt</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Commercial Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Conflicts of Law and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Alberta]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[British Columbia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[conflicts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court of appeal for ontario]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[damages]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[forum non conveniens]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[injury]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[international]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[interprovincial]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jurisdiction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Morguard]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Muscutt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ontario]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[order and fairness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[real and substantial connection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[resorts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United States]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Van Breda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Volkswagen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[World-Wide]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelitigator.ca/?p=667</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In a recent decision, a five judge panel of the Court of Appeal for Ontario revised the legal test to be applied when the Ontario courts are asked to assume jurisdiction over a foreign defendant.  The Court’s decision in Van Breda v. Village Resorts Ltd. clarifies the applicable legal principles and should provide greater guidance to Ontario courts on whether and when they can properly take jurisdiction over foreign defendants.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thelitigator.ca/2010/04/court-of-appeal-reconsiders-test-for-jurisdiction-over-foreign-defendants/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/2009/12/statements-to-securities-commission-are-protected-by-absolute-privilege/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thelitigator.ca/2009/12/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/2009/12/statements-to-securities-commission-are-protected-by-absolute-privilege/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Ontario Securities Commission panel decisions criticize regulators’ disclosure practices</title>
		<link>http://www.thelitigator.ca/2008/11/ontario-securities-commission-panel-decisions-criticize-regulators-disclosure-practices/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thelitigator.ca/2008/11/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/2008/11/ontario-securities-commission-panel-decisions-criticize-regulators-disclosure-practices/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Top Ontario court opens the door to recognition of foreign class action judgments binding Ontario plaintiffs</title>
		<link>http://www.thelitigator.ca/2005/03/op-ontario-court-opens-the-door-to-recognition-of-foreign-class-action-judgments-binding-ontario-plaintiffs/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thelitigator.ca/2005/03/op-ontario-court-opens-the-door-to-recognition-of-foreign-class-action-judgments-binding-ontario-plaintiffs/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Mar 2005 21:01:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kenneth Dekker</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Commercial Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[class members]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Illinois]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ontario]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ontario court of appeal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[procedural protections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[proceeding]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[substantial connection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[superior court of justice]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelitigator.ca/?p=205</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In a decision released last month, the Ontario Court of Appeal agreed with the finding of Cullity J. of the Superior Court of Justice that foreign class actions that include Canadian plaintiffs as class members may be recognised and enforced in Ontario &#8211; as long as Ontario plaintiffs are given sufficient procedural protections in the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thelitigator.ca/2005/03/op-ontario-court-opens-the-door-to-recognition-of-foreign-class-action-judgments-binding-ontario-plaintiffs/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

