 |
In a world of increasing complexity and cost-sensitivity, advocates everywhere have been called upon to be more creative in their approaches to dispute resolution. In keeping with this trend, litigation lawyers practising at Lawson Lundell possess all of the advocacy and other skills identified with the conventional role of the courtroom lawyer, and they regularly argue cases before courts and administrative tribunals at all levels in Canada. But they have also led the profession in developing expertise in other forms of dispute resolution, such as mediation, arbitration and med-arb; thus, they are well-equipped to guide their clients involved in civil disputes (and other situations requiring representation and advocacy) to the most satisfactory and cost-effective solutions that are attainable, whatever the forum may be.
The firm's litigation practice broadly reflects the business focus of its practice overall, although the business focus is not an exclusive one. In addition to its many business clients, Lawson Lundell also acts for numerous institutional clients involved with professional regulation and for individuals who are subject to regulation; for governments and emanations of government and for those who are affected by the activities of the same; for crown corporations and utilities, and those who are affected by the activities of such entities; and so forth. Thus, public law problems also represent a large segment of the firm's litigation practice. The breadth of the practice is bounded only by the extraordinarily diverse needs of the firm's very large and generally sophisticated client base. Lawson Lundell's litigation lawyers are occupied daily with providing clients with the advice and representation they require in order to deal with civil disputes, administrative processes, and all other situations where advocacy before courts and other decision-making bodies is required.
Lawson Lundell's litigation department consists of an energetic group of advocates led by several senior members of the bar who are both complemented and (where necessary) supported by the other members of a team of over 40 experienced advocates at all levels of call working out of offices in Vancouver, Calgary and Yellowknife-the principal commercial centres in Canada's west and north. Their pooled expertise makes them leaders in litigation relating to (among other subjects):
aboriginal rights and claims;
public utility and regulatory law;
commercial disputes;
administrative and constitutional matters;
environmental liabilities;
products liability claims;
disputes relating to corporate governance, shareholder rights, etc.;
corporate securities and financing;
construction and engineering;
class actions;
creditors' remedies and collections;
insolvency and realization;
competition and anti-trust issues;
forestry, mining, oil and gas and other natural resources issues;
health law;
media law (including defamation and Privacy Act claims);
freedom of information and protection of privacy;
professional regulation;
pension and trust issues;
taxation;
real property and land use disputes;
intellectual property and high technology issues (including copyright, trademark, patent and industrial design-related matters); and
transportation law.
Lawson Lundell has, over the years, been involved in some of Western and Northern Canada's most significant litigation. To give just a few examples, it represented a private sector intervenor in Delgamuukw-a case that produced a judgment from the Supreme Court of Canada that is considered the leading authority on Aboriginal title in this country; it represented a major industrial concern/private utility in connection with public consultation hearings and then a high-profile dispute surrounding the government closure of a major hydroelectric project; it was involved in early court decisions applying the Charter of Rights and Freedoms-for example, by challenging government restrictions imposed upon the mobility of medical professionals; it has acted for clients seeking regulatory approval for the construction of major oil and gas pipeline projects; it represented the manufacturer of an asbestos-containing construction product in Canada's first "asbestos-in-buildings", toxic tort case; and it represented a municipal government in litigation yielding the leading Canadian decision concerning the liabilities of municipal bodies to property owners in connection with the inspection services they perform in relation to the granting of building and occupancy permits.
Recent examples of significant matters in which the firm's litigation lawyers are at present (or, have been) involved include:
acting for an exporter of electricity from Canada in connection with the Canadian aspects of high-profile American regulatory proceedings and class actions arising out of the California Energy Crisis of 2000 and 2001;
acting for a board of trustees of a public sector pension plan in a class action involving the distribution of a surplus in an ongoing pension plan;
acting for numerous industrial landowners in contaminated site litigation brought under the Waste Management Act;
acting for the operator of a landfill in a constitutional and administrative challenge of bylaws passed by a Regional District;
acting for a major oil sands company in litigation over the preparation of its new mine site;
acting for several manufacturers of industrial equipment in subrogated, major loss personal injury cases involving allegations of negligent design and failure to warn;
acting for a civil liberties organisation as an intervenor in a Charter of Rights and Freedoms challenge to a school district's attempt to prohibit the use of certain reading materials as teaching tools;
acting for the regulators of self-governing professions in prosecuting regulatory offences and infractions committed by their members;
acting for a regulated professional in a jurisdictional challenge of his professional body's attempt to regulate his professional practice in the absence of statutory jurisdiction to do so;
acting for a prominent golf and country club in a complex arbitration of a renewal of its lease with an Aboriginal band;
acting for a major public utility in an application for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity in respect of a controversial, gas-fired generation plant;
acting for a large international engineering firm in an action involving claims against insurers arising out of the construction of a mine in South America;
acting for a national daily newspaper in a Privacy Act proceeding brought by members of an Aboriginal band in connection with the alleged appropriation of their images and cultural symbols in an advertising campaign;
acting for several large mining companies in respect of claims against insurers for indemnity against historical environmental claims;
acting for a major international software developer in connection with alleged "pirating" and copyright infringement concerning software designed for industrial applications;
acting for a group of partners in respect of the dissolution of a large and prominent law firm; and
acting for a major international health care products employer in connection with the closure of a large plant and the attendant terminations and relocations of dozens of plant employees.
Lawson Lundell's objective, in every retainer, is to match resources to client needs. Sometimes this means that a single lawyer is assigned to provide specific advice or representation, or both; for other files it is necessary to create teams of lawyers with technical support to deal with larger and more complex matters. While the firm is widely recognised for its expertise in handling complex, multi-party litigation, it also readily takes on smaller matters. Lawson Lundell's object is always to tailor its legal services to clients' unique requirements and then deliver services of the highest quality in the most cost-effective way possible.
View a listing of team members in this practice area.
For more information contact Craig Ferris at 604.631.9197 or cferris@lawsonlundell.com.
| |
|
Resources: Speaking Engagement - Litigation: June 17-18, 2008
The Implied Undertaking Rule - December 5, 2007
Understanding Arbitration Clauses in Class Actions: Have the Sands Shifted Once Again? - September 21, 2007
Pension Dispute Arbitration Prevails Over Class Proceedings - July 30, 2007
|
|
