The Court of Appeal has released a decision stating that the common law duty of honest contractual performance does not necessarily require a lender to lend new money.

In its decision released on October 19, 2012, the Supreme Court of Canada has held that while an employer’s ownership of a laptop, its workplace policies and practices, and technology in place can diminish an employee’s reasonable expectation of privacy, they do not eliminate it.

The powerful "Mareva" injunction (or freezing order) is one of the most devastating weapons in the Canadian commercial litigation arsenal. Such an order prevents a party (usually an apparent fraudster) from removing, spending or dissipating assets during litigation to deprive the claimant of the benefits of a judgment.

In its March 2010 Budget, the Government of Canada signalled plans to create a legislative framework to enable credit unions to incorporate and continue their operations as federal entities.

A recent English decision highlights the danger that even a well-intentioned financial institution may face if it fails to strictly obey a Mareva injunction order freezing the accounts of one of its clients: R. (Revenue & Customs Prosecution Office) v. Lloyds TSB Plc [2007] EWHC 2393 (Admin)

Approximately one year ago the Business Practices and Consumer Protection Act (the "Act") was proclaimed into force. The Act imposed new restrictions on creditors and debt collectors’ ability to obtain consumer credit reports and prohibited certain debt collection practices.