News & Publications Results
|Pension and Benefits Law Bulletin: CAPSA Guideline no. 8 - Defined Contribution Pension Plans Guideline
On March 28, 2014, the Canadian Association of Pension Supervisory Authorities (CAPSA) released new Guideline #8 “Defined Contribution Pension Plans Guideline” to clarify certain best practices for defined contribution (DC) pension plan administrators. This new guideline is intended to supplement, and not replace, the requirements set out in CAPSA Guideline #3 “Guidelines for Capital Accumulation Plans”. Although CAPSA Guidelines are not law, they provide pension plan administrators with a useful standard of best practices.
The new guideline is notable in that it elaborates on the responsibilities of DC plan members, such as in respect of investment selection (if applicable) and selecting from options provided on termination. It also characterizes member communication requirements differently depending on the stage of a DC plan member’s career. The new guideline was released with an accompanying reference document providing information on the various regulated retirement products available to DC plan members in the payout phase.
Specifically, the new guideline:
• provides a summary of the various CAPSA guidelines lready applicable to DC plans (#3, 4, 5 and 6);
• sets out responsibilities of the plan administrator, mployer, plan sponsor, third-party service providers, fund holder and plan members, all with respect to DC plans;
• gives plan administrators guidance regarding the tools nd other communications they should provide to DC lan members at various stages of the members’ careers (during the accumulation phase, approaching the payout phase and during the payout phase); and
• provides guidance on what may constitute an adverse amendment for DC plans.
|Labour & Employment Law Bulletin: Who is an “employee” under the British Columbia Human Rights Code?
The Supreme Court of Canada has provided some important guidance regarding who qualifies as an "employee" under the British Columbia Human Rights Code in the case of McCormick v. Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP.
The case centred around a complaint filed with the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal by Mr. McCormick, an equity partner at Fasken, alleging that the requirement to divest and retire discriminated against him as an “employee” on the basis of his age. While the Tribunal found that Mr. McCormick was an “employee” for the purposes of human rights legislation, its decision was eventually overturned by the British Columbia Court of Appeal. In upholding the Court of Appeal’s decision, the Supreme Court of Canada found that the factors determinative of an employment relationship are the extent to which an individual is controlled by, and dependent on, the alleged employer.
|International Comparative Legal Guide to: Corporate Governance 2014 (Canada)
In this Guide, Rita Andreone, QC and Michael Lee contribute a chapter discussing corporations in Canada, with a focus on public companies and with the intention that private corporations will find it useful in structuring and measuring their own governance frameworks.
|Doing Business in Western Canada
This guide has been prepared by Lawson Lundell as a concise resource outlining certain key relevant laws and regulations that companies should consider when doing business in Western Canada.
|The Crown’s Duty to Consult and the Role of the Energy Regulator
Today, for many Energy Regulators, project proponents, Aboriginal groups and intervenors, issues surrounding Aboriginal rights and title and the Crown’s duty to consult Aboriginal peoples have become a critical focus in the regulatory approval processes for major (and not-so-major) projects. In his article, "The Crown’s Duty to Consult and the Role of the Energy Regulator," published in Energy Regulation Quarterly, Keith Bergner examines the role of the Energy Regulatory in respect of the Crown’s duty to consult.
|Labour & Employment Law Bulletin: Privacy Commissioner’s Report on Police Information Checks Released
On April 15, 2014, the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner for British Columbia (the “Privacy Commissioner”) issued a report regarding the use of police information checks in British Columbia (the “Report”).
|"Selling an entire strata building." Western Investor, April 2014, Author||15.4.14|
|"Tech startups: How law firms are getting their business", Lexpert, April 2014
In this article, Val Mann discusses how law firms should handle being approached by an early-stage entrepreneur. According to Val, when she is approached "she conducts an informal vetting process to make sure she understands the business idea, then talks to people at incubators and in the venture and angel communities."
|“Polar Mining: The Next Frontier”||03.4.14|
|Mining report: Mining companies need to do a better job of preparing for AGMs
Under a tide of mounting investor scrutiny, which can lead to costly proxy battles, it is particularly important for mining companies to understand the increasing range of legislative, regulatory and governance-related rules that control these meetings. This article outlines a few key points to remember in seeking to mitigate shareholder disputes, including some defensive measures and responsive strategies.
|“Roadblocks to Listing on TSX-V,” BCBusiness.ca, March 2014, Co-Author||09.3.14|
|A light at the end of the tunnel||04.3.14|
|Moore v. Getahun: Ontario’s Restrictive Approach to Communications between Counsel and Experts||04.3.14|
|Marko Vesely interviewed in the Vancouver Sun article "Lulu app stirs controversy: dating intelligence for girls or ‘unacceptable surveillance’?"
Marko Vesely is quoted in the Vancouver Sun article "Lulu app stirs controversy: dating intelligence for girls or ‘unacceptable surveillance’?" discussing the defamation issues that may arise as a result of comments made on the controversial Lulu app, an application that allows women to anonymously share ratings of their dates among their Facebook friends.
|• Moore v. Getahun: Ontario’s Restrictive Approach to Communications between Counsel and Experts||18.2.14|
|Marko Vesely interviewed by Financier Worldwide
Marko Vesely was recently interviewed by Financier Worldwide for its Commercial Arbitration Annual Review. This review examines issues and developments in commercial arbitration around the world. In the interview, Marko offers a Canadian perspective, outlining some of the key benefits of arbitration, recent changes to arbitration legislation and the practical considerations that need to be addressed when undertaking complex multi-jurisdictional arbitrations in Canada.
|Canadian PR for the Real World
Marko Vesely discusses PR and the law in Canadian PR for the Real World, a textbook featuring Canadian case studies, information on PR and the law, best practices, and PR practitioners from across the country.
|Union's Right to Employees' Home Contact Information from Employer Trumps Privacy Concerns
Ritu Mahil and Euan Sinclair'sco-authored article, "Union's Right to Employees' Home Contact Information from Employer Trumps Privacy Concerns", examines whether an employer is required to provide employees’ home contact details to assist the union with its communications, in light of both the recent Supreme Court of Canada decision in Bernard v. Attorney General (Canada) in the federal context, and the prevailing authority in British Columbia.
|Lawson Lundell named British Columbia Firm of the Year in Litigation by Benchmark Canada
Lawson Lundell is pleased to announce that it took home two awards and was a finalist in three other categories at Benchmark Canada’s second annual awards ceremony, held last night at the Intercontinental Hotel in Toronto. Benchmark Canada is the only legal ranking publication to focus exclusively on litigation in Canada. The awards honour Canada’s leading litigators, law firms and in-house legal counsel.
This year Lawson Lundell received the following awards:
• Firm of the Year (Litigation) – British Columbia
• Aboriginal Law Litigator of the Year – Keith Bergner
Congratulations to the Litigation Group and Keith Bergner on these well-deserved recognitions.
|Stop Shooting Cannonballs at my Customers’ Canoe! Welcome Clarification on the “Unlawful Means” Tort from the Supreme Court Of Canada
Lisa Peters' article "Stop Shooting Cannonballs at my Customers’ Canoe!" discusses the Supreme Court of Canada's recent decision in A.I. Enterprises Ltd. v. Bram Enterprises Ltd., 2014 SCC 12. This is an important commercial decision as it clarifies and narrows the scope of the tort of unlawful interference in economic relations. Canadian businesses will also welcome the Court's reference to commercial certainty as one of the principal reasons to clarify and limit the scope of this tort.