As someone practicing for several years in the field of privacy law, I am asked to provide advice and to answer a variety of questions from both clients and other legal professionals on a myriad of privacy, access to information, and cyber liability related topics. The purpose of this article is to provide insight into […]
Ransomware and phishing attacks are on the rise, as are the significant legal and economic considerations that follow. As businesses adapt to the “new normal” of extreme uncertainty caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, countless employees are faced with the prospect of working remotely in a variety of new (and sometimes less-than-secure) environments. Cybercriminals have taken notice.
Bill 30 – An Act to Amend the Insurance Act (the “Bill”) was introduced to the New Brunswick Legislature by the Honourable Cathy Rogers on December 16, 2017. The amendments were proposed in order to prevent insurance companies from denying coverage to innocent co-insureds for property damage caused by an abusive partner and to enhance the protection of assets for victims of intimate partner violence.
Issues of the applicability of the intentional or criminal acts exclusion will arise in both the duty to defend context as well as with respect to the obligation to indemnify. As with any case that involves the interpretation of any aspect of an insurance policy, knowledge of the basic principles of insurance law developed by the Supreme Court of Canada is essential.
We have recently learned that the Ontario Superior Court of Justice will be re-visiting the January 2016 decision granting default judgment in the case of Jane Doe 464533 v. ND.
The present litigation resulted from two actions launched by Armel Drapeau (Drapeau) following an investigation carried out by the Financial and Consumer Services Commission (Commission) into Drapeau’s business of trading securities.
The plaintiff, Shirley Shannon, had been sexually assaulted by her psychiatrist Dr. Akoto. Shannon suffered emotional and mental distress as a result of the sexual assaults and attempted suicide resulting in extensive physical injuries.
The recent decision of Fleming v. Massey raises the very interesting question of whether an injured employee can waive his or her rights under Part X of the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act (WSIA).
Insurance Litigation case law updates from across the region.
Grafton Connor Property Inc. v Murphy, 2015 NSSC 195
In 2007, the North-End Pub in Halifax was destroyed by fire. It was owned by Grafton Connor and insured by Lloyd’s of London Underwriters under an insurance policy that had been placed through Marsh Canada Limited.
A recent decision of the Ontario Grievance Settlement Board raises the interesting question of an employer’s vicarious liability for an employee’s privacy breach.