DLA Piper (Canada), two other firms make three appearances each before Commercial List court

Three law firms lead the way in weekly roundup of Ontario Commercial List activity

DLA Piper (Canada), two other firms make three appearances each before Commercial List court
Law firms appearing for the week ending April 13, 2022

DLA Piper (Canada) LLP, Lax O’Sullivan Lisus Gottlieb LLP, and Paliare Roland Rosenberg all had lawyers involved in corporate/commercial cases heard by the Commercial List courts in Toronto this week.

DLA Piper (Canada) LLP appeared in three cases

Derek Bell, partner, represented the applicants in Kingsberg Development Corporation et al v. Guery R. Goyo et al. Bell’s practice focuses on commercial list litigation, ranging from public company disputes, merger and acquisition litigation, securities litigation, cross-border litigation, and insolvency.

David Foulds, partner, represented the plaintiff Huachangda Canada Holdings Inc. in two cases – Huachangda Canada Holdings Inc. v. Solcz Group Inc. and Huachangda Canada Holdings Inc. et al v. Solcz Group Inc. with other plaintiffs. Foulds has extensive experience in the defence of class proceedings, disputes relating to intellectual property and technology, commercial disputes relating to infrastructure projects, including public-private partnerships and fraud and asset recovery.

Three appearances for Lax O'Sullivan Lisus Gottlieb LLP

Nadia Campion represented respondents Goyo and one other in Kingsberg Development Corporation et al v. Guery R. Goyo et al., multiple defendants in Samis + Company v. Strigberger et al., and the defendant in Samis + Company v. Meyer. Campion has a broad civil litigation practice that includes complex commercial disputes, shareholder oppression applications, director and officer liability, estate matters, class actions, and professional liability.  

Paliare Roland Rosenberg Rothstein LLP in three cases

Chris Paliare, partner, represented plaintiff SS&C Technologies Canada Corp. in SS&C Technologies Canada Corp. v. The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation et al. Paliare’s practice covers all aspects of counsel work including appeals, complex corporate and commercial litigation, securities litigation, administrative law, public law, and other similar cases.

Kenneth Rosenberg, partner, represented respondent 30 Roe Investments Corp. in Kingsett Mortgage Corporation v. 30 Roe Investments Corp. Rosenberg is highly regarded for finding strategic and practical solutions to complex problems, including financing, shareholders and/or contractual disputes, insolvency, and regulatory disputes.

Jeffrey Larry, partner, represented respondent Vandyk Holdings Incorporated in HRJL Real Estate Investment III LP by its general partner HRJL Heart Lake GP Inc. v. Vandyk Holdings Incorporated et al. Larry has a diverse business litigation practice, including corporate/commercial, securities and bankruptcy, and insolvency litigation.

Aird & Berlis LLP represented two plaintiffs

Dennis O’Leary, partner, represented the plaintiff in 908593 Ontario Limited, operating as Eagle Travel Plaza by its court appointed receiver BDO Canada Limited v. Atradius Credito y Caucion S.A. Reaseguros. O’Leary practises in the areas of energy and environmental, transportation, regulation, insurance and commercial litigation.

Sanjeev Mitra, partner, represented plaintiff Duca Financial Services Credit Union Ltd. in Duca Financial Services Credit Union Ltd. V. 2360607 Ontario Inc. et al. Mitra’s practice focuses on bankruptcy and insolvency law, advising and acting for both Canadian and international institutions.

Blaney McMurtry LLP in two cases

Louis Brzezinski, partner, represented the plaintiffs in 10480169 Canada Inc. v. Toronto-Dominion Bank, and Albert Gelman Inc. in its capacity as trustee in bankruptcy of Spiros Pantziris v. 1529439 Ontario Limited et al. Brzezinski practices in all areas of business reorganization, insolvency, liquidation, and bankruptcy.

Chaitons LLP in court for two plaintiffs

Harvey Chaitons, partner, represented Skymark Finance Corporation in Skymark Finance Corporation v. Mahal Venture Capital Inc. et al. Chaitons practices in the areas of bankruptcy and insolvency with particular emphasis on receiverships and corporate restructurings, including insolvency litigation.

Sam Rappos, partner, represented Marshallzehr Group Inc. in Marshallzehr Group Inc. v. 2366885 Ontario Inc. (formerly known as Vandyk-Heartlake Limited). Rappos’ practice focuses on advising debtors, creditors, and other interested parties with respect to bankruptcy and restructuring proceedings. He also maintains a busy commercial litigation practice focusing on breach of contract, fraud, enforcement, and corporate governance.

Goldman, Sloan, Nash & Haber LLP appeared twice

Robert Malen, partner, represented the plaintiff in Alexander v. Three Dees Management Limited et al. Malen is the chair of the Litigation group with a practice devoted to the resolution of commercial, shareholder, banking, real estate, construction, and employment disputes.

Joel Turgeon, associate, represented the plaintiff in Canadian Equipment Finance and Leasing Inc. v. The Hypoint Company Limited et al. Turgeon represents officer of the Court, creditor and debtor corporations and interested parties in bankruptcy, restructuring, and administration proceedings.

Heller, Julian, and Associates appeared in two cases this week

Julian Heller, partner, represented the plaintiffs in Samis + Company v. Strigberger et al. and Samis + Company v. Meyer.

McCarthy Tétrault LLP was before the court twice

Eli Mogil, partner, represented the two respondents in SS&C Technologies Canada Corp. v. The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation et al. Mogil has an active business litigation practice with particular emphasis on shareholder, contractual and real estate disputes.

Trevor Courtis, associate, represented applicant Alexander in Alexander v. DHA Holdings Inc. et al. Courtis’ practice focuses on corporate restructuring and insolvency matters and complex commercial litigation.

Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP involved in two cases

Lauren Tomasich, partner, represented respondent Kazmi in Evergreen Learning Inc. et al v. Swyft Technologies Inc. et al. Tomasich’s commercial litigation practice focuses on commercial arbitration, corporate and securities litigation and white-collar defence and enforcement proceedings.

Mark Gelowitz, partner, represented defendant to counterclaim Sauro in Huachangda Canada Holdings Inc. et al v. Solcz Group Inc. Gelowitz’s practice is in corporate and commercial law including mergers and acquisitions litigation, director and officer liability, corporate governance, shareholder disputes, oppression, privacy, libel and slander, real estate lease disputes, mining litigation and class actions.

Rory McGovern PC represented same company in two cases 

Rory McGovern represented 2256900 Ontario Ltd. in 2256900 Ontario Ltd. v. 2399862 Ontario Inc. et al. and Voreon Inc. v. 2256900 Ontario Ltd. et al. McGovern practices in the areas of civil litigation, business law, franchise law and commercial leasing.

Van Kralingen & Keenberg LLP appeared in two cases for company

Megan Keenberg, partner, represented respondent Voreon Inc. and Katotakis in 2256900 Ontario Ltd. v. 2399862 ONTARIO INC. ET AL and Voreon Inc. in Voreon Inc. v. 2256900 Ontario Ltd. et al. Keenberg has substantial experience in the management of diverse complex commercial claims involving breach of contract, breach of fiduciary and/or statutory duties, negligence, fraud, civil conspiracy, regulatory compliance, professional liability, and other commercial causes of action.


Recent articles & video

Squire Patton Boggs makes global board appointments

'We can take challenges and create opportunities'

Roundup of law firm hires, promotions, departures: Dec. 4, 2023 update

Global Best in Law 2023 revealed

Addleshaw Goddard elects new managing partner

Parliament looks at adding coercive control to the Criminal Code

Most Read Articles

Mastermind Toys blames Competition Bureau for impeding sale and forcing bankruptcy proceedings

Osgoode project keeps an eye on Canadian mining companies abroad

SCC finds cannabis found in traffic stop should be included in evidence in Zacharias case

Judge decries excessive fees for family law case determining consent to send child on vacation