People

Services

Industries

Firm

About

Knowledge

Careers

News

Events

Contact

Connect

Privacy Policy

Disclaimer

Terms of Use

Accessibility

Legal

Calgary

Edmonton

Montréal

Ottawa

Toronto

Vancouver

New York

Simon Foxcroft

Mining, Energy, Transportation, Construction and OH&S Lawyer at Bennett Jones Edmonton

Partner

Sander A.J.R. Grieve KC

Global Mining Finance, M&A, Exploration, Development and Extraction Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Akash Purewal

Commercial Transactions Lawyer at Bennett Jones Edmonton

Associate

Greenland Resources announced it has signed an off-take agreement with Finnish Outokumpu, the largest producer of stainless steel in Europe and the second largest producer in the Americas, for the long-term supply of molybdenum oxide, a critical raw material in Europe.

Canadas Greenland Resources Signs Ten Year Off Take Agreement

Canada's Greenland Resources Signs Ten Year Off-Take Agreement to Supply Molybdenum to Finland's Outokumpu

David J. Wahl, FCIArb

Construction Arbitration & Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

Vasilis F. L. Pappas, FCIArb

International Arbitration Lawyer at Bennett Jones Vancouver and Calgary

Partner 

Christopher Petrucci

Commercial Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

The Alberta Court of Appeal in Husky Oil Operations Limited v Technip Stone & Webster Process Technology Inc, 2024 ABCA 369 recently held that parties attempting to impose an arbitration requirement on third-party beneficiaries of a contract that contains an arbitration clause must make the obligation to arbitrate clear and explicit in the contract.

Clear and Explicit Contractual Language Required to Impose Arbitration on Third Party Beneficiaries

Clear and Explicit Contractual Language Required to Impose Arbitration on Third-Party Beneficiaries

Artem N. Barsukov FCIArb

International Arbitration and Construction Lawyer at Bennett Jones Edmonton

Jonas Patron

Commercial Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Edmonton

Last week, the Ontario Court of Appeal released its decision Lochan v Binance Holdings Limited, 2024 ONCA 784, in which it refused to stay a class action proceeding in favour of arbitration. In doing so, the Court reaffirmed two key exceptions to the kompetenz-kompetenz principle, which gives an arbitral tribunal the power to rule on its own jurisdiction.

Ontario Court of Appeal Strikes Important Balance

Ontario Court of Appeal Strikes Important Balance in Applying Exceptions to the Kompetenz-Kompetenz Principle

A recent decision of the Alberta Court of King’s Bench in Orica Canada Inc v ARVOS GmbH, 2024 ABKB 97 has attracted considerable attention among members of the arbitration bar. In it, the Court of King’s Bench articulated important exceptions to two established principles that, to date, have largely been taken for granted among arbitration practitioners.

Alberta Court Articulates Important Exceptions to the Kompetenz Kompetenz Principle

Alberta Court Articulates Important Exceptions to the Kompetenz-Kompetenz Principle and the Scope of Arbitration Clauses

Lorelei Graham

Food and Agribusiness Lawyer, IP Lawyer, Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Across the Atlantic, the European Union (EU) and its member states have also been encouraging climate-resilient agri-tech innovation, but their approach to intellectual property incentives has been a bit different. The European Union has set ambitious climate goals (like achieving climate neutrality by 2050) and launched the European Green Deal, a broad policy agenda to support sustainable technologies. While funding and regulations (such as support for sustainable farming practices) are big parts of the EU strategy, there is also recognition that IP rights play an important role in fostering innovation. However, unlike Canada or the recent US pilot program, Europe has not implemented a unified “green channel” for patent examination at the European Patent Office.

Fast Tracks and Green Gaps Part III

Fast Tracks and Green Gaps Part III: Green Without the Label: Europe's Pragmatic IP Approach to Agri-Tech Innovation

Steven L. Major KC

Commercial Dispute, Construction, Fraud, Police and Personal Injury Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

Drew C. Broughton

Corporate Commercial and M&A Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

Kevin Myson

Corporate, Commercial Transaction, Energy, Natural Resource and M&A Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

Canada is navigating a "wild frontier" in the energy industry, with a unique opportunity to forge successful and sustainable partnerships both domestically and internationally. This was the rallying call at the Energy Business Forum during the 74th Canadian Energy Executive Association (CEEA) conference in Banff, Alberta, where industry leaders gathered to share visions for the future of Canada's energy landscape.

Key Takeaways From the Wild Frontier Energy Business Forum CEEA 74

Key Takeaways From the "Wild Frontier" Energy Business Forum at CEEA '74

Melanie Teetaert

Commercial Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Vancouver

Jennifer (Jenn) K. Choi

Maruska Giacchetto

This article examines the Ontario Court of Appeal's decision in J.P. Thomson Architects Ltd. v Greater Essex County District School Board, 2025 ONCA 378, which provides critical clarification on the interpretation of multi-step dispute resolution (MSDR) clauses. MSDR clauses, commonly used in commercial contracts, outline escalating steps such as negotiation, mediation, and arbitration to resolve disputes. The Court addressed ambiguities in the drafting of MSDR timelines, emphasizing that specified timeframes should be interpreted as minimum waiting periods rather than strict deadlines. The decision overturned a lower court ruling that barred a party from arbitration due to a perceived failure to meet a 30-day mediation request deadline. This article highlights the importance of precise drafting in MSDR clauses, discusses the implications of the Court's decision, and provides practical guidance for parties drafting or negotiating dispute resolution provisions in commercial agreements.

Do you need to rush to mediate - Ontario Court of Appeal

Do You Need to Rush to Mediate? Ontario Court of Appeal Clarifies Interpretation of Multi-Step Dispute Resolution Clause

The United States has long been a major player in both agri-tech innovation and the intellectual property (IP) landscape. In the past, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) offered its own version of a green patent fast-track to encourage climate-friendly inventions. Notably, in 2009 to 2011 the USPTO ran a Green Technology Pilot Program that prioritized examination for certain eco-friendly patents. The pilot ended in 2012, but more recently the USPTO brought back the idea in June 2022, with the Climate Change Mitigation Pilot Program, which was essentially an accelerated examination program for patent applications directed to fight climate change. Under this program, inventions designed to reduce or monitor greenhouse gas emissions, including many clean energy, sustainability or climate-smart agriculture innovations, could be examined out of turn. Importantly, like Canada’s program, the US pilot did not charge the usual petition fee for expediting. The goal was to spur green tech by making it faster and cheaper to secure IP rights.

Fast Tracks and Green Gaps Part II

Fast Tracks and Green Gaps Part II: Innovation Interrupted: What the End of the USPTO's Green Program Means for Agri-Tech

Climate change is driving a surge in agricultural technology (agri-tech) innovations aimed at making farming more resilient and sustainable. From drought-resistant crops to carbon-capturing soil techniques, these climate-focused agri-tech solutions are crucial for global food security. An often-overlooked piece of this puzzle is intellectual property (IP) strategy, namely how patents and other IP rights are used to protect and incentivize innovation.

Fast Tracks and Green Gaps Part I

Fast Tracks and Green Gaps Part I: Planting the Future: Why Canada's IP System May Be the Climate Innovation Sleeper Hit

Dispute Resolution :
Key Considerations for Corporate Counsel

Authors


Bennett Jones Speaking Engagement Dispute Resolution : Key Considerations for Corporate Counsel March 6, 2023 Authors Artem N. Barsukov FCIArbPartner David Hawreluk and Artem Barsukov joined a panel at the Association of Corporate Counsel Alberta's annual conference—It’s a Brand-New World: Tools for Your 2023 In-House Toolbox. In the session, entitled Dispute Resolution in 2023: Key Considerations for Corporate Counsel, David and Artem discussed: how technology and today's legal environment has impacted the dispute resolution process; what strategies are available for dispute resolution and when they make sense; and best practices for managing risk and a legal team's capacity when faced with dispute resolution. Share by Email Social Media Download Download Subscribe Republishing Requests For permission to republish this or any other publication, contact Amrita Kochhar at kochhara@bennettjones.com. For informational purposes only This publication provides an overview of legal trends and updates for informational purposes only. For personalized legal advice, please contact the authors. Authors Artem N. Barsukov FCIArb, Partner Edmonton • 780.917.4266 • barsukova@bennettjones.com

Dispute Resolution : Key Considerations for Corporate Counsel

Authors

Dispute Resolution :
Key Considerations for Corporate Counsel