Home » Category: 'Business, Commercial, Civil Litigation'

Business, Commercial, Civil Litigation

Aphria Inc. v. Canada Life Assurance Co.: Can the common law be changed with prospective-only effect?

In February 2026, the SCC heard the appeal in Aphria Inc. v. Canada Life Assurance Co. The question presented asks whether commercial landlords who reject a tenant’s lease repudiation are subject to the doctrine of mitigation. On its face the case seems to be of niche interest: significant for commercial property and contract lawyers, of course, but perhaps a dry topic for others. Far from it. As became apparent during oral arguments before the SCC, the appeal in Aphria puts in issue fundamental principles regarding the nature of common law decision-making.

APPEAL WATCH: Fair Election Outcomes and Unfair Election Processes (Anglin v Resler)

The Supreme Court of Canada has heard the appeal from the judgment in Anglin v Resler, 2024 ABCA 113, leave to appeal to SCC granted (41298). This case is a high-stakes appeal from a motion to strike as it raises a single issue affecting Canadian voters and the integrity of elections: whether a defeated candidate can bring a tort claim against an election official based on an allegation that the candidate lost the opportunity to win the election due to the conduct of the election official.

No Material Change in Ambiguity: The SCC’s Decision in Lundin

When is a public company required to disclose new information to the public? The answer to this question is far from clear, and the ambiguity that lies at its core plagues securities lawyers who are tasked with advising clients on corporate disclosures. In light of this ambiguity, the Supreme Court of Canada’s (“SCC”) highly anticipated decision in Lundin Mining Corp v Markowich was expected to provide some clarity to the question of when to disclose information relating to a company’s affairs. This clarity, however, remains elusive.

Fresh Starts and Student Loans: Assessing the Supreme Court’s Approach in Piekut

The Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Piekut v Canada (Attorney General), 2025 SCC 13 (“Piekut”) resolves a long-standing dispute over when student loans become dischargeable in bankruptcy. At issue was whether the seven-year waiting period in s. 178(1)(g)(ii) of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (“BIA”) runs from any cessation of studies or only from […]

Van Breda Revisited: the SCC on Jurisdiction Simpliciter in Sinclair

This summer, the Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal in Sinclair v Venezia Turismo, 2025 SCC 27. In a 5-4 ruling, the majority clarified how to determine a court’s jurisdiction simpliciter. This case has significant implications for businesses offering services to Canadians abroad.

APPEAL WATCH: Old Leases, Same Law? ONCA Reaffirms “No Duty to Mitigate” in Aphria

In June 2025, the Supreme Court of Canada granted leave to appeal the Court of Appeal for Ontario’s decision in Canada Life Assurance Company v. Aphria Inc,. The Court's decision reaffirms that when a commercial landlord does not accept a tenant's repudiation of a lease and insists the lease remain in full effect, the landlord has no duty to mitigate the resulting damages. This decision adheres to the binding authority of Highway Properties Ltd v Kelly, Douglas and Co Ltd., where the SCC outlined four actions a landlord can take in response to a tenant's fundamental breach.

APPEAL WATCH: The Opportunity to Clarify Contributory Fault in Contract Law and Revisit Summary Judgment Motions in Arcamm v Avison Young

The SCC has granted leave to appeal the decision in Arcamm v Avison Young, 2024 ONCA 925. The Court is expected to determine whether contributory fault governs the apportionment of damages arising from breach of contract, and to provide, for the first time in over a decade, renewed guidance on realizing the culture shift envisioned in Hryniak v Mauldin, 2014 SCC 7.

Flying Fair? SCC Weighs in on International Air Transportation Association v Canada

Airline passengers in Canada recently scored an important win regarding consumer protection. In International Air Transportation Association v Canada (Transportation Agency), 2024 SCC 30 [International Air], the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) unanimously held that the Canada Transportation Agency’s (the “Agency”) Air Passenger Protection Regulations, SOR/2019-150 [Regulations] were valid regulations that did not violate the Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air, 2242 UNTS 309 [Montreal Convention].

Intentions Matter: Excluding Liability for Statutorily Implied Conditions in Earthco v Pine Valley

In Earthco Soil Mixtures Inc v Pine Valley Enterprises Inc, 2024 SCC 20 [Earthco], the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) affirmed that common law principles of contractual interpretation apply to exclusion clauses under the Sale of Goods Act, RSO 1990, c S1 [SGA]. While “express agreement” sufficient to oust SGA liability must include an explicit statement of joint intention, it does not require precise legal terminology or “magic words” (Earthco, para 98).