Special Feature: Judicial restraint and lawyers' creativity

Recent case reminds courts they aren’t in the business of providing blanket protection to receivers

Special Feature: Judicial restraint and lawyers' creativity

A recent decision from the Ontario Superior Court of Justice illustrates a rising trend among judges to question the wording and scope of draft orders that have been submitted for court approval.

This special feature from Woods LLP explores the nuances of insolvencies arising from the Cosa Nova Fashions Ltd. v. The Midas Investment Corporation case.

Sign up now and gain insight into:

  • How a clearly defined scope can shield insolvencies from liability 
  • Why it’s necessary for lawyers to ensure support for their orders 
  • Why and when a court grants blanket approvals

Recent articles & video

Nominations open for the 2024 Lexpert Rising Stars

Data and full lifecycle analysis crucial for ESG reporting, says Miller Thomson’s Christie McLeod

Navigating negligence: legal strategies in E.R negligence litigation

Jennifer Teskey, the Canadian managing partner at Norton Rose Fulbright, on talent and motivation

Marina Paperny on rejoining BLG to advise litigators after a nearly 30-year judicial career

Public Safety Minister emphasizes cyber defences in response to Auditor General's report

Most Read Articles

Whether 'open banking' or 'consumer-driven' banking, the goal of sharing data remains the same

BC Supreme Court awards damages in ICBC privacy breach class action

How to spot ChatGPT output masquerading as legal analysis

Husband's transfer of matrimonial home to wife fraudulent: Ontario Court of Appeal