Team Members ()

Publications ()

News ()

Pages ()

Services ()

  • Our Team

    Our Team

    • Lawyers & Clerks
    • Leadership Team
    • Board of Directors
    • Human Resources
    • Marketing & Business Development
    • Paraprofessional Services
  • Our Services

    Our Services

    • Service Areas
      • Aboriginal and Indigenous Law
      • Administrative Law
      • Agribusiness
      • Banking and Financial Services
      • Bankruptcy and Insolvency
      • Business Disputes
      • Business Immigration
      • Class Actions
      • Construction Law
      • Corporate and Business
      • Corporate Finance and Securities
      • Corporate Governance and Compliance
      • Cross-Border Law
      • Education Law
      • ESG (Environmental, Social, & Governance)
      • Estates and Trusts
      • Environmental Law
      • Foreign Direct Investment
      • Franchise Law
      • Health Law
      • Insurance
      • Intellectual Property
      • Labour and Employment
      • Litigation
      • Maritime Law
      • Media & Entertainment
      • Municipal Law
      • P3 and Infrastructure
      • Pensions and Benefits
      • Privacy, Data Protection and Cyber Security
      • Public Law
      • Real Estate
      • Regulation of Professions
      • SISIP LTD Allowances Class Action
      • Tax
      • Technology
      • View All
    • Industries
      • Cannabis
      • Construction & Property Development
      • Emerging & High Growth Companies
      • Energy & Natural Resources
      • Financial Services
      • Government & Institutions
      • Insurance
      • Manufacturing, Processing & Sales
      • Mining
      • Ocean Economy
      • Private Clients
      • Technology
      • View All
    • More Services
      • MC Advisory
      • MC Legal Lab
  • Our Insights
  • Our Firm

    Our Firm

    • Our Values
    • Our History
    • Our Representative Work
    • Our Global Reach
    • Our News
    • Diversity & Inclusion
    • Collective Social Responsibility
    • Pro Bono Program
  • Our Careers

    Our Careers

    • Lawyer Opportunities
    • Business Professional Opportunities
    • Paralegal & Legal Assistant Opportunities
    • Summer Student & Articling Opportunities
    • Diversity & Inclusion
    • Collective Social Responsibility
  • 1.866.439.6246
  • Contact
  • Search
  • Stay Updated
  • Contact Us
  • LexMundi World Ready
  • Privacy Policy
  • http://linkedin.com
  • http://facebook.com
  • http://twitter.com
  • 1.866.439.6246
Home > Our Insights > 5 Key FAQs About Canadian Cannabis Company “Key Investor” Disclosure Requirements
Publication

5 Key FAQs About Canadian Cannabis Company “Key Investor” Disclosure Requirements

Published:

June 26, 2019

Author(s):

  • Jeffrey Hoyt
  • David Fraser
  • Sophia Mapara
  • Elizabeth McIsaac

Share

Print

Information disclosure is a key theme that emerges from Canada’s new cannabis regulatory regime: the government wants lots of information from those to which it grants a cannabis –related licence – especially about “key investors” of certain licensees. It’s not surprising that the new regime, comprised of the Cannabis Act, Cannabis Regulations and other related regulations (all of which took effect on October 17, 2018), requires cannabis industry licensees to disclose information to the federal government. What might be surprising, however, to certain licensees, their investors (particularly, privately held companies), and others that do business with them (for example, commercial lenders) is the broad scope of both the definition of a “key investor”, and of the information about them that some licensees must disclose.

The Cannabis Regulations establish categories of licences for cannabis-related activities (cultivation, processing, analytical testing, sale and research, and licences respecting drugs containing cannabis) and impose differing disclosure obligations on them. Cannabis cultivation, processing or sale licensees, which we’ll call “Licensed Producers” or “LPs” (the term used in the Access to Cannabis for Medical Purposes Regulations (ACMPR) that were repealed when the new cannabis law regime took effect, but that’s still commonly used in the industry) are subject to some unsurprising – and some potentially surprising – disclosure requirements. All licensees, including LPs, must maintain certain records and make them available to the federal government minister designated as responsible for the Cannabis Act (formerly, the Minister of Health, but as of December 2018, the Minister of Border Security and Organized Crime Reduction) on request. Most come as no surprise: for example, certain license-holders must record the identity of people entering or exiting a cannabis storage area, monitor operations and storage areas, and record unauthorized intrusions into operations and storage areas. Licensed Producers (LPs), however, must also provide extensive and ongoing information disclosure to the designated Minister. One of the most onerous: information about the LP’s “key investors”. And while the requirement to disclose information about “key investors” might come as no surprise, just who a “key investor” is might surprise LPs, their investors and those that do business with them.

5 “Key Investor” Disclosure FAQs

It’s key that all stakeholders clearly understand the Cannabis Regulations’ key investor disclosure obligations to avoid surprises and to ensure compliance. Here are the answers to five key frequently asked questions about cannabis companies’ “key investor” disclosure requirements.

1. What’s a “key investor”?

The lynchpin of the definition of a “key investor” is “control” over the LP. The Cannabis Regulations define the term “key investor” far more broadly than the way in which many other federal laws define it. Section 241 of the Cannabis Regulations defines a “key investor” in a LP as a person (which can be either an individual or a corporation or other entity) that exercises, or is in a position to exercise, direct or indirect control over the LP by virtue either of:

  • Having provided money, goods or services directly or indirectly to the LP.
  • Holding an ownership interest or other right or interest in, or in respect of, a business or organization that the LP operates.

2. What’s “control” for the purpose of determining an LP’s “key investors”?

It looks like the federal government will interpret “control” broadly, though it remains to be seen whether the courts will agree with that approach. But it does require LPs – and those investing in and those doing business with them – to think hard about who a “key investor” is when structuring commercial agreements.

Many laws, such as corporate, securities and tax laws, use the term “control”. Depending on whether, and if so how, a particular law defines it, “control” generally refers to the ability to influence an entity’s decisions and actions either by:

  • “Legal” control (a.k.a. “de jure” control), which generally refers to the direct or legal ability to do so through voting rights, such as the shareholders in a corporation, the partners in a partnership or “ultimate controllers” under the Investment Canada Act, whether or not that ability is actually exercised.
  • “Factual” control (a.k.a. “de facto” control), which generally refers to the effective ability to do so, directly or indirectly, based on relevant considerations in the particular context.

The existence of a “legal control” relationship is usually straightforward to identify. The existence of a “factual control” relationship, however, is usually more complex to identify because the relevant considerations can vary depending on the particular law, and in some contexts (such as the Income Tax Act) is the subject of legal dispute and interpretation. The Cannabis Regulations’ definition of “key investor” indicates considerations relevant to the existence of a factual control relationship are: the provision of money, goods or services directly or indirectly to an LP; or holding an ownership interest or other right or interest in, or in respect of, a business or organization the LP operates. This suggests the federal government seeks to cast the “key investor” net very broadly. The government’s Cannabis Licensing Application Guide, at Appendix I, confirms this view, providing examples of the forms and factors it will consider relevant to determining whether a party has factual control:

  • The percentage of ownership of voting shares (when it’s not more than 50%) relative to other shareholders’ holdings, but noting that any ownership more than 25% in combination with other factors is likely a significant indication of “control”.
  • Ownership of a large debt of an organization that may become payable on demand.
    Shareholder agreements including the holding of a casting vote.
  • Commercial or contractual relationships of the organization (for example, economic dependence on a single supplier or customer).

The Cannabis Licensing Application Guide is an articulation of how the government says it will apply the cannabis laws, but it’s not actually the law. If a party challenges the government’s interpretation of “key investor”, a court will ultimately define whether a factual control relationship exists, and whether a party is a “key investor”, within the meaning of the Cannabis Regulations. However, under the interpretation of “key investor” in the Cannabis Licensing Application Guide, the government could determine a factual control relationship exists between an LP and these parties, for example, by virtue of the rights and obligations set out in their agreement:

  • Suppliers – and customers. Those with which an LP has a commercial agreement for the provision of goods or services to the LP – or by the LP.
  • Commercial lenders & creditors. Commercial lenders or other creditors under debt financing arrangements.
  • Contracted managers. Where an LP is a partnership or a limited partnership, those with whom they enter into management contracts

3. What information must a LP disclose about its “key investors”?

It depends, but generally: a lot. The scope and volume of the information LPs must disclose under section 241 of the Cannabis Regulations about their key investors can be significant – and can include commercially sensitive information.

Basics. A LP must disclose the following in respect of any and all of its key investor(s):

  • Their name and address.
  • A detailed description of the means by which the key investor exercises, or is in a position to exercise, control over the LP.
  • Details about the transaction that makes the key investor an investor in the LP.

Money, Goods or Services. A LP must disclose additional information about each “key investor” depending on how it became a “key investor” under the Cannabis Regulations’ definition – and must do so each time the key investor provides the LP, directly or indirectly, with money, goods or services:

  • Money. If the investor became a “key investor” by providing money directly or indirectly to a LP, the LP must also disclose in respect of that key investor:
    • The amount of money the key investor provided to the LP.
    • The date on which the key investor provided the money to the LP.
    • The terms and conditions under which the key investor provided the money.
    • If the key investor provided the money by way of a loan to the LP, the interest rate and term of the loan.
  • Good or Services. If the investor became a “key investor” by providing goods or services directly or indirectly to a LP, the LP must also disclose in respect of that key investor:
    • A description of the goods or services the key investor provided to the LP.
    • The fair market value of the goods or services when the key investor provided it.
    • The date on which the key investor provided the goods or services.
    • The terms and conditions under which the key investor provided the goods or services.

And regardless of how a key investor became such, the LP must also disclose:

  • Subsequent transactions. Once a “key investor” becomes a “key investor”, the LP must disclose more than just the transaction by which it became a key investor: it must disclose all of these details in relation to each and every subsequent transaction between it and that key investor.
  • Other benefits. If the key investor received any other benefit from the LP as a result of having provided money, goods or services, or by having an ownership or other right or interest in, or in respect of, the LP then the LP must also disclose that benefit. Unfortunately, the Cannabis Regulations don’t offer any guidance in defining what these might be, though it seems reasonable this requirement would capture items such as complimentary tickets to an event or gifts, and possibly even donations or product discounts. Similarly, the Cannabis Regulations don’t offer any guidance about whether every benefit must be disclosed, or there’s a threshold value for such disclosure comparable to, for example, the Canada Revenue Agency’s guideline requiring employees to disclose only gifts valued at over $50.
  • Repayment. Each time a LP repays money or returned goods to the key investor, the LP must disclose the amount repaid and the date of repayment. Where any goods were provided to a LP, the LP must disclose a description of the goods, their fair market value when the LP returned them, and the date on which the LP returned them.
  • Third party claims. If the LP knows of it, it must disclose whether any interest the key investor holds in or in respect of the LP has actually been, or is subject to an agreement where it will or potentially could be: mortgaged, pledged, assigned, hypothecated (pledged as collateral to secure a debt) or sold (partly or completely) to any person (an individual or an entity). And if the LP knows, it must also disclose the name and mailing address of that person.

4. Are there any exemptions from the “key investor” disclosure obligations?

Yes. The Cannabis Regulations set out these exemptions from the key investor disclosure obligations:

Publicly traded LPs. Notably, none of the key investor disclosure requirements apply to publicly-traded LPs. This is presumably because the disclosure that securities laws and exchange rules require of public companies, including public LPs, achieves the same level of disclosure that the Cannabis Regulations’ key investor disclosure requirements seek to achieve – although a recent review by the Canadian Securities Administrators (CSA) concluded disclosure by publicly-traded companies in the cannabis industry needs improvement.

Pre-license Key Investors. There are some advantages to getting in early: the LP isn’t required to disclose the details about the transaction by which an investor became a “key investor” if that transaction completed before the LP was granted its license – but the LP must still disclose all other information about and in respect of that key investor that the Cannabis Regulations require, including those about subsequent transactions between the LP and that key investor.

ACMPR-Continued Licences. And it isn’t required to disclose the details about the transaction by which an investor became a “key investor” if: that transaction completed before the Cannabis Regulations took effect; the LP obtained its license under the former Access to Cannabis for Medical Purposes Regulations (ACMPR); and that license was continued under the new cannabis licensing law regime. But, again, the LP must still disclose all other information about and in respect of the key investor required under the Cannabis Regulations.

5. Who can obtain the “key investor” information that an LP discloses to the government?

It’s clear that it’s best practice for a LP to inform prospective “key investors” that the Cannabis Regulations require it to collect certain information from and about the key investor, and disclose that information to the federal government. It’s also clear that a prospective “key investor” needs to agree to this to become a “key investor”. But it’s not clear yet who can access that disclosed information, or to whom the federal government can disclose it. To date, there are no decisions of any court or privacy commissioner that offers further guidance around these issues. However, it’s still early days in the cannabis legal regime, and clarity around access to and further disclosure will likely come in due course. Right now, it seems the purpose of the key investor disclosure requirements isn’t to publicize the information, but to facilitate the regulation of the cannabis industry further to the stated purposes of the Cannabis Act: to protect public health and public safety, including to reduce and deter illicit activities in relation to cannabis. Thus the responsible Minister can – and arguably only should – disclose the information where:

  • It’s in the public interest to do so.
  • The Minister considers it’s necessary to protect public health or safety.
  • It’s necessary to fulfill Canada’s international obligations in relation to cannabis.
  • To enforce the Cannabis Act and Regulations.

Access by the public & the media. All information in the federal government’s custody or control, which includes the key investor information an LP is required to disclose, is subject to the federal Access to Information Act (ATIA). It’s unclear how the government will respond to an Access to Information Act request for key investor information. However, the ATIA does have exceptions designed to protect personal information and certain confidential business information from public access that could apply to key investor information, although these exceptions are still subject to the overriding ability to disclose information if it’s in the public interest to do so or the Minister considers it’s necessary to protect public health or safety.

Disclosure. The Cannabis Act authorizes the Minister to disclose certain information, in certain circumstances; however, these relate primarily to the protection of public health or safety, fulfilment of Canada’s international obligations, and enforcement of the Cannabis Act and Regulations.   

  • Personal Information. The Minister can disclose any “personal information” obtained under the Act, without either consent or notice, if it considers the disclosure is necessary to protect public health or safety.
  • Confidential Business Information. The Minister can also disclose any “confidential business information” (as the Act defines it) obtained under the Act, without either consent of or notice to the person to whose business or affairs the information relates, if it considers the disclosure is necessary to protect public health or safety.
  • Other Information. The Minister can disclose to the International Narcotics Control Board any information relating to cannabis it obtained under the Cannabis Act (or under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act before the Cannabis Regulations took effect) if the disclosure is necessary to enable Canada to fulfill its international obligations in relation to cannabis. The Minister can also disclose certain information to a public authority of a foreign country authorized by that country to approve the importation or exportation of cannabis into or from that country for the purposes of the administration or enforcement of the Cannabis Act or Regulations, or if necessary to allow Canada to fulfill its international obligations in relation to cannabis.

Please contact your McInnes Cooper lawyer or any member of the Cannabis Team @ McInnes Cooper to discuss this topic or any other legal issue.


McInnes Cooper has prepared this document for information only; it is not intended to be legal advice. You should consult McInnes Cooper about your unique circumstances before acting on this information. McInnes Cooper excludes all liability for anything contained in this document and any use you make of it.

© McInnes Cooper, 2019. All rights reserved. McInnes Cooper owns the copyright in this document. You may reproduce and distribute this document in its entirety as long as you do not alter the form or the content and you give McInnes Cooper credit for it. You must obtain McInnes Cooper’s consent for any other form of reproduction or distribution. Email us at [email protected] to request our consent.

Share

Print
View Related Content

Related Lawyers

  • Jeffrey Hoyt

    Jeffrey Hoyt

    Partner

  • David Fraser

    David Fraser

    Privacy Lawyer | Partner

  • Sophia Mapara

    Sophia Mapara

    Lawyer

  • Elizabeth McIsaac

    Elizabeth McIsaac

    Lawyer

Related Services

  • Agribusiness
  • Corporate Governance and Compliance
  • Banking and Financial Services

Related Industries

  • Cannabis

Related Publications

View All Publications
  • New Brunswick Business Corporations Act: 10 Key Proposed Amendments

    Jan 27, 2023

    The New Brunswick government has proposed significant amendments to the New Brunswick Business Corporations Act. Bill 24 An Act to Amend the…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Mortgage Deficiencies: NB Appeal Court Clarifies Use of “Market Value” & More

    May 2, 2022

    On April 14, 2022, the New Brunswick Court of Appeal released its decision in Royal Bank of Canada v. Estate of Susan Lynn Williams, revisiting…

    Read More
    Publication
  • N.L. Corporations Act: 3 Key Changes Effective April 1, 2022

    Feb 23, 2022

    On April 1, 2022, changes to the Newfoundland and Labrador Corporations Act proposed in Bill 24 An Act to Amend the Corporations Act will take…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Canadian Governance Diversity Disclosure Obligations: Get on Board

    Sep 29, 2020

    This publication has been updated as at December 22, 2022. It’s a forgone conclusion that diversity in thought and in leadership makes good…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Top 5 Legal Considerations When Launching a FINTECH Startup

    Jun 12, 2020

    The financial technology (Fintech) industry uses technology to support and enhance financial and banking services.

    Read More
    Publication
  • Callidus Capital Corp: Policing CCAA Proceedings

    May 11, 2020

    The Supreme Court of Canada recently released a much-awaited decision regarding the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA). The CCAA is…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Coping with COVID-19: 5 Steps to Compliant Socially Distant AGMs

    Mar 17, 2020

    Business corporations laws and stock exchange policies mandate that issuers hold annual general meetings (AGM) and set requirements for when and…

    Read More
    Publication
  • CSA Staff Notice 51-359: Corporate Governance Compliance by Public Cannabis Co.’s

    Jan 22, 2020

    All issuers must comply with both periodic and ongoing securities law corporate governance (and other) disclosure requirements. This can,…

    Read More
    Publication
  • “Register for Individuals with Significant Control”: 5 Key Facts CBCA Corporations Need to Know to Comply

    May 21, 2019

    As of June 13, 2019, private companies incorporated under the Canada Business Corporations Act (CBCA) must prepare and maintain a register of…

    Read More
    Publication
  • 10 Burning Employer FAQs About Cannabis @ Work

    Dec 13, 2018

    This publication has been updated as of October 15, 2020. Canada became only the second country in the world to legalize cannabis (or…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Cannabis Compliance: 3 Tips to Help Cannabis Industry Reporting Issuers Comply with Securities Law Disclosure Obligations

    Nov 16, 2018

    Companies engaged in the cannabis supply chain are highly regulated by federal and provincial cannabis-specific laws as well as a myriad of…

    Read More
    Publication
  • 3 Ways P.E.I.’s Business Corporations Act Modernized P.E.I. Corporations

    Jul 18, 2018

    This publication has been updated as at January 26, 2023. Prince Edward Island corporations were formerly governed by the P.E.I. Companies…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Webinar | 5 Workplace Policy Areas to Manage Marijuana Risks

    Jun 27, 2018

    The legalization of recreational cannabis in Canada is imminent. Employers are feeling the heat to prepare – even as they continue efforts to…

    Read More
    Webinar
  • The More Modern & Transparent Canada Business Corporations Act (CBCA)

    Jun 12, 2018

    This publication has been updated as at July 8, 2022. Changes to the Canada Business Corporations Act (CBCA) over the past several years have…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Medical Marijuana, Residual Impairment & The Duty to Accommodate in Re Lower Churchill Transmission Construction Employers’ Assn. Inc. and IBEW, Local 1620 (Tizzard)

    Jun 8, 2018

    This publication has been updated as of September 28, 2020. In the last few years, many employers have been focused on preparing for and…

    Read More
    Publication
  • N.S. Appeal Court puts a Lid on medical Pot: No health plan coverage & no workers compensation benefits in Canadian Elevator Industry Welfare Trust Fund v. Skinner & Skinner v. Nova Scotia (Workers’ Compensation Appeals Tribunal)

    Apr 26, 2018

    The N.S. Court of Appeal has reached two decisions ending one employee’s quest for coverage of the costs of his medical marijuana – at least…

    Read More
    Publication
  • The Dope on Medical Cannabis Health Benefits: Key Considerations for a Coverage Strategy

    Jan 25, 2018

    Insurers have generally been leery of coverage for medical cannabis in both the health benefit claims and in cost of care claims in the personal…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Supreme Court of Canada Confirms Auditor Negligent & Liable for $40M in Livent v. Deloitte

    Dec 23, 2017

    Parents often threaten their children that if their behaviour did not improve they will get a lump of coal in their Christmas stockings. On…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Is cryptocurrency the right tool for your company to raise capital? 5 FAQs about Initial Coin Offerings (ICO)

    Dec 22, 2017

    Blockchain technology has already been a transformative force in a number of sectors. Its most prominent use to date has been as the…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Denis Mahoney & Brittany Keating in the NLCA 2018 Construction Journal | Testing 1-2-3: The latest on drug & alcohol testing in safety-sensitive workplaces

    Dec 18, 2017

    The answer to the question, “What’s employers’ rationale for implementing workplace drug and alcohol testing?” is pretty…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Canada’s Private Corporation Tax Proposals: Year End Planning in the Face of Uncertainty

    Nov 20, 2017

    October 2, 2017 marked the end of the consultation period relating to the taxation of private corporation proposals the Department of Finance…

    Read More
    Publication
  • “Facilitation Payments” to Foreign Public Officials Violates Canada’s Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act

    Nov 17, 2017

    It’s official: as of October 31, 2017, “facilitation payments” contravene Canada’s Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act (CFPOA).…

    Read More
    Publication
  • 2018 Planning Starts Now for TSX-Listed Issuers: TSX Updates Disclosure Requirements

    Nov 2, 2017

    On October 19, 2017, the Toronto Stock Exchange (TSX) announced it had adopted amendments to its Company Manual. Originally proposed in Spring…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Supreme Court of Canada Confirms Cashing Banks Continue to Bear the Biggest Risk of Fraudulent Cheques in Teva Canada Ltd. v. TD Canada Trust

    Oct 31, 2017

    On October 27, 2017, the Supreme Court of Canada confirmed that a bank that pays out on a fraudulent cheque has the protection of section 20(5)…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Federal Crown’s Deemed Trust Priority for Unremitted GST/HST Survives Bankruptcy

    Aug 28, 2017

    Recently, the Federal Court of Appeal confirmed that a tax debtor’s bankruptcy does not extinguish the federal Crown’s priority to proceeds…

    Read More
    Publication
  • 5 Anti-Corruption Law Compliance Program Tips

    Aug 16, 2017

    In the not-so-distant past, Canadian enforcement of its anti-corruption and anti-bribery legal regime has been relatively laid-back. But the…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Proposed Changes to Business Income Tax Rules: A Gamechanger for Private Business Owners

    Aug 4, 2017

    On July 18, 2017, Canada’s Minister of Finance released proposed changes to the Income Tax Act (Canada) that, if implemented, will mark one of…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Steering clear of personal liability for oppression: Supreme Court of Canada offers guidance to corporate leaders in Wilson v. Alharayeri

    Jul 17, 2017

    A corporation does not always sail in calm or safe waters. Cash shortages, unattainable or unmet goals, Board disagreements over the best course…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Watching Your Claims Go Up In Smoke? Five Key Medical Cannabis Cost of Care Considerations

    Jul 10, 2017

    The legal landscape of cannabis (a.k.a. marihuana, weed, pot …) is changing, both reflecting - and contributing to - more relaxed attitudes…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Bradley Proctor in the Workplace Environment Health & Safety Reporter

    May 16, 2017

    Recreational cannabis isn’t legal yet: Canada’s federal government has proposed legislation to legalize and regulate access to recreational…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Estate Planning in the Age of Medical Assistance In Dying (MAID)

    Apr 21, 2017

    In three years (lightning speed in the law), medically assisted dying went from being illegal to being legal. A great deal has changed, a great…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Cannabis Legalization in Canada: Seeds have sprouted, but the branches are still bare

    Apr 20, 2017

    On April 13, 2017, Canada’s federal government introduced legislation that, if passed into law, will legalize recreational cannabis in Canada.…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Nip it in the Bud: A 5 Step Plan for Employers to Prepare for Cannabis Legalization in Canada

    Apr 17, 2017

    Recreational cannabis isn’t legal yet - but much of the associated stigma is already gone, usage is up and employers are feeling the workplace…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Register Before You Lobby in N.B. under Lobbyists’ Registration Act

    Apr 5, 2017

    NOTE: Consultants who were already lobbying and in-house lobbyists already employed by an organization when the new Act took effect were…

    Read More
    Publication
  • 5 Steps for Compliant Disclosure on Social Media

    Mar 30, 2017

    Social media platforms, like Instagram, Twitter, LinkedIn, YouTube, Facebook and GooglePlus, arguably have more followers and are more closely…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Cyber Security: A 5-Step Data Breach Risk Mitigation Plan for Corporate Boards & Directors

    Feb 24, 2017

    This publication has been updated as at January 12, 2023. Many organization (66%) store the personal information of customers. employees,…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Supreme Court of Canada Warns Judgment Creditors: Implied Consent is Enough to Disclose Discharge Statement in Royal Bank of Canada v. Trang

    Nov 22, 2016

    On November 17, 2016 the Supreme Court of Canada decided a mortgagee has the mortgagor’s implied consent to disclose its discharge statement…

    Read More
    Publication
  • NB Court Clarifies Mortgage Lenders’ Rights on Default: 5 Steps for NB Mortgage Lenders to Consider

    Sep 23, 2016

    On September 15, 2016, the New Brunswick Court of Appeal clarified the province’s statutory regime governing both the exercise of a lender’s…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Ontario Follows Suit With Securities Act Changes Tightening the Belt on Insider Trading Regulation

    Aug 15, 2016

    The standards expected of market participants are steadily increasing in response to demand to address white collar crime – including…

    Read More
    Publication
  • NS Dives into Pooled Registered Pension Plans (PRPP)

    Jun 30, 2016

    As of June 25, 2016, provincially regulated workers and employers in Nova Scotia, Quebec, BC and Saskatchewan can participate in Pooled…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Common Ground: Retail & Commercial Condominium Financing

    Jun 30, 2016

    The condo real estate market, both retail and commercial, is hot. But condo developers and unit buyers need funding. Here’s the legal…

    Read More
    Publication
  • A Penalty by Any Other Name: Supreme Court of Canada Says Interest Rate Increase Triggered by Default, Whatever It’s Called, Infringes the Interest Act in Krayzel Corp. v. Equitable Trust Co.

    May 9, 2016

    On May 6, 2016, the Supreme Court of Canada decided that a mortgage imposing a higher interest rate in the event of default and reserving a…

    Read More
    Publication
  • NS Poised to Take the Plunge into Pooled Registered Pension Plans (PRPPs)

    May 5, 2016

    NOTE: As of June 25, 2016, provincially regulated workers and employers in Nova Scotia, Quebec, BC and Saskatchewan can participate in Pooled…

    Read More
    Publication
  • New Early Warning Reporting System Exemptions for Certain Securities Lending Arrangements Effective May 9, 2016

    May 2, 2016

    Amendments changing the early warning reporting system take effect on May 9, 2016, provided all necessary approvals are obtained (except in…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Construction Project Manager Sentenced to 3½ Years for Workplace Accident in R. v. Vadim Kazenelson (aka “Metron”)

    Mar 9, 2016

    In what appears to be the first case of the conviction of a front line supervisor under section 217.1 of the Criminal Code and sentencing to a…

    Read More
    Publication
  • New Kid on the Block: Crowdfunding Joins Traditional Equity-Based Funding Options for Startups & SMEs

    Oct 19, 2015

    Access to sufficient capital to fund operations, research and development, and other costs is a key challenge for start-ups and for some small…

    Read More
    Publication
  • The Changing Face of Aboriginal Law: 1 Short Year, 2 Big Court Decisions, 3 Key Implications for the Energy & Natural Resources Sector

    Jul 17, 2015

    On the heels of National Aboriginal Day, we pause to take a look back at two significant Aboriginal law cases decided in the last year, how…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Unproven Aboriginal Rights Enough For Lawsuit Against Private Industry

    Jul 10, 2015

    On April 15, 2015, British Columbia’s Court of Appeal confirmed that First Nations can make certain legal claims grounded in Aboriginal rights…

    Read More
    Publication
  • 3 Reasons for Directors, Officers and Supervisors To Take Occupational Health and Safety Personally

    Jun 25, 2015

    Most people know that a company itself has OHS obligations, and that it risks corporate liability if it violates those obligations. However, not…

    Read More
    Publication
  • The Value of Hindsight – 3 Steps to Help Financial Advisors Avoid Client Claims and Complaints

    Mar 30, 2015

    Hindsight is 20/20. Lawyers can’t always predict the outcome of a legal claim. But when a dispute between an investment client and her…

    Read More
    Publication
  • 5 “Legal” Reasons Why Natural Resource Companies Should Care About Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)

    Dec 10, 2014

    “Corporate Social Responsibility” (CSR) as a concept has been floating around in business-speak for years – but stakeholders in the mining…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Complying With Canada’s Anti-Spam Legislation (CASL): Protecting Directors & Officers from Personal Liability

    Oct 14, 2014

    CASL’s anti-spam sections came into force on July 1, 2014. Every organization that CASL affects should now be complying with it – and their…

    Read More
    Publication
  • The Top 5 Corporate Governance Best Practices That Benefit Every Company

    Sep 16, 2014

    This publication has been updated as at August 25, 2022. Many believe that only public companies or large, established companies with many…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Share Purchase Transactions: Tips For Lenders

    Apr 29, 2014

    Lenders are often faced with a situation where a customer (Borrower) approaches them for funds to complete an acquisition of the shares of a…

    Read More
    Publication
  • General Security Agreements: Tips & Traps

    Aug 28, 2013

    A general security agreement (GSA) is the most common form of personal property security used in the Atlantic Provinces to secure commercial…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Legal Update: The Duty to Consult – Important Lessons from Canada’s Mining Sector

    Mar 15, 2013

    Recent developments in Ontario and Yukon are an important reminder of the practical implications of the Crown’s legal Duty to Consult with…

    Read More
    Publication

Stay Updated

Subscribe to McInnes Cooper to stay current with our leading insights on legal updates, trends, news, events, and services.

Connect With Us:
  • Follow us on Twitter @mcinnescooper
  • Like us on Facebook @mcinnescooperlaw
  • Join us on LinkedIn @mcinnes-cooper
  • 1.866.439.6246
  • Privacy Policy
  • Copyright © 2023 — McInnes Cooper
Lex Mundi Logo MC Advisory Logo