01 Plain Language for clients and counsel
Written to be used.
Complex legal topics explained clearly for clients, professionals, and the public, and precise enough to actually inform the decisions that follow.
Plain-language explainers, case commentaries, and practice notes across civil litigation, commercial litigation, business law, appeals, and select cross-border topics. Read, then get in touch if your situation calls for it. The Information Portal is a working archive, not marketing copy. Each post is written by counsel at the firm and drafted to the same standard of care we apply to the files we handle.
What you'll find
Each post is written by counsel at the firm and drafted to the same standard of care we apply to the files we handle. The aim is practical: explain the doctrine, note what has changed, and point to what matters next. Long-form articles, case commentary, and short practice notes on the mechanics of procedure.
Complex legal topics explained clearly for clients, professionals, and the public, and precise enough to actually inform the decisions that follow.
Recent developments, new case law, and procedural changes, written up as they happen with the practical consequences drawn out plainly.
Actionable takeaways so readers can move from reading to decision-making, whether that is on their own, with in-house counsel, or with us.
The information provided on this site is for general informational purposes only and should not be relied upon as legal advice. Content may not be comprehensive or current at the time you read it. Consult a qualified lawyer on any specific legal question or matter. Grigoras Law is not responsible for any damage or loss arising from reliance upon this information.
Find what you need
Search the library of blog posts, case commentaries, and practice notes by keyword.
Latest content
Defamation is one of the most frequently litigated torts in Ontario. This article explains the three-element test, what makes a statement defamatory under Canadian law, how courts assess reference and publication, and where the line falls between actionable defamation and protected expression.
Enforcing a foreign judgment in Ontario involves navigating a unique legal landscape that respects international judgments while safeguarding local standards. Ontario courts generally uphold foreign decisions, allowing creditors to seek enforcement through streamlined processes. However, local debtors may raise defences, such as jurisdictional challenges or public policy conflicts. Whether you’re enforcing a judgment or resisting one, Grigoras Law provides the expertise needed to guide you through this complex process.
Financing a business transaction, whether it’s an asset purchase or a share acquisition, can be complex, involving multiple stakeholders, financial arrangements, and legal considerations.
The Ontario Divisional Court, a branch of the Superior Court of Justice, has a specialized role in Ontario’s legal system. It primarily hears appeals from administrative tribunals, civil cases, and handles judicial reviews of government actions.
In today’s data-driven world, protecting personal information in the private sector is critical. This blog delves into the legal framework governing privacy in Canada, focusing on how businesses must handle personal data responsibly. With insights from Toronto privacy lawyers, we explore your rights to access and correct information, the importance of consent in data collection, and the legal recourse available in cases of privacy breaches. Whether you’re a business looking to enhance your data protection practices or an individual seeking to safeguard your privacy, this guide provides the essential knowledge you need.
Real estate development is a multifaceted venture that requires navigating a complex legal landscape. From the initial concept to the final construction and sale, developers must address numerous legal considerations to ensure their projects are successful and compliant with applicable laws.
In Ontario, defamation claims can involve various types of damages, with aggravated damages being one of the critical compensatory mechanisms. Aggravated damages are awarded to provide additional compensation when the defendant’s conduct has caused further harm to the plaintiff beyond the initial defamation.
In the digital age, the dynamics of defamation have evolved significantly, particularly with the rise of the Internet and social media platforms. The traditional principles of defamation law, which were primarily localized, now face new challenges in determining where a defamatory statement published online has caused harm and where legal action should be pursued.
Consent can be a powerful defence in defamation cases. If someone agrees to a defamatory statement, they can’t later claim defamation. This can be explicit, like signing a contract, or implied through actions, such as repeating a defamatory remark publicly. Understanding this legal concept can help you navigate situations where consent might impact your rights.
Defamation law often treads a fine line between protecting individual reputation and upholding freedom of expression. In this intricate legal landscape, the defence of justification, or truth, plays a pivotal role.
For now, Thorpe v. Boakye serves as a pivotal case in understanding the evolving legal landscape around digital platform liability. It highlights a significant divergence between Canadian and U.S. legal systems in handling online defamation. Canadian courts appear more open to considering platforms like Google as publishers and thus potentially liable, whereas U.S. law, under the CDA, leans heavily towards protecting these platforms from such liabilities.
In corporate law, ensuring accountability and integrity remains paramount. Ontario, with its robust legal framework, offers stakeholders an essential tool for redress when corporations suffer at the hands of their own management: derivative actions.
In the intricate world of corporate law, shareholders possess a slew of rights. When these rights are jeopardized, or when the corporation’s actions seem unjust or prejudicial, shareholders can turn to specific remedies enshrined in the law.
In the world of commercial leasing, every detail matters. The terms outlined in these agreements lay the groundwork for business relationships that may last years, if not decades. But what happens if a party believes a term in the lease is missing or has been inaccurately represented?
In the world of false statements and their legal repercussions, malicious falsehood stands out as a unique tort focusing on economic harm stemming from disparaging remarks about one’s property or goods.
Starting a business is a thrilling adventure, akin to setting out on an uncharted path. Every decision made at the outset lays the foundation for future success. One such pivotal decision is selecting the right business structure. This isn’t just a bureaucratic step; it shapes the very essence of your business, influencing liability, tax implications, operational processes, and more.
Navigating the complex landscape of commercial tenancies becomes even more intricate when terms like “assignment” and “sublease” emerge. While these terms may sometimes be used interchangeably by those less acquainted with property jargon, they embody distinct concepts with specific legal implications. Grasping the differences between them is vital for both tenants and landlords to facilitate seamless transitions and evade potential pitfalls.
The freedom of the internet allows for uninhibited self-expression. While many embrace this freedom to share positive stories, ideas, and feedback, others exploit it to spread malicious rumors or make derogatory comments without facing immediate consequences. The cloak of anonymity can embolden such individuals, making the internet a potential hotbed for defamation.
In the constantly evolving realm of legal jurisprudence, the case of Sase Aggregate Ltd. v. Langdon offers intriguing insights into the principles of knowing receipt, knowing assistance, and unjust enrichment. This article dives into why Sase Aggregate Ltd., the appellant, was unsuccessful in both its initial application to the lower court and its subsequent appeal to the Court of Appeal for Ontario.
For many business owners, the question “How much is my business actually worth?” weighs heavy on their minds. This is particularly true if you’re considering selling your business. The value of your business significantly influences the returns you receive from its sale. This factor not only affects your negotiation strategies but also has potential implications for your future financial well-being. The process of determining this value is known as business valuation, and it’s an intricate, multilayered exercise that requires expert knowledge.
The recent appeal in Park Lawn Corp. v. Kahu Capital Partners Ltd. to the Court of Appeal of Ontario has thrown open the floodgates of discussions on the costs, efficiency, and economic implications of anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) motions.
When the invisible line of respect between individuals in society is crossed through defamatory comments, the law provides a remedy through defamation lawsuits. However, these cases are not black-and-white. Their outcomes can be influenced by the actions and behaviour of involved parties – both before and after the publication of the defamation. In Ontario, this scrutiny of conduct plays a pivotal role in shaping legal outcomes.
Understanding defamation law, especially when considering the potential damages, is no small feat. The nuances and complexities can be overwhelming, yet having a clear comprehension of what the damages entail is invaluable for plaintiffs and defendants alike. In Ontario, defamation law encompasses three key types of damages: Aggravated, Special, and Punitive Damages.
There is an ever-present tension between the right to freedom of speech and the need to protect individuals and corporations from defamation. In Ontario, Canada, the Protection of Public Participation Act 2015 (Ontario PPPA) aims to tip the balance towards the former, providing a robust defence for those who choose to express their views on matters of public interest.
When we talk about “parliamentary privilege,” we refer to a set of rights and protections that enable lawmakers at the federal and provincial levels in Canada to perform their duties without fear of being legally liable. These privileges safeguard the democratic principles Canada is built upon, ensuring each branch of government respects the others’ roles.
In 2019, Ontario recognized “publicity which places an individual in a false light” – the “false light tort” – as a part of the common law. Despite its relatively straightforward definition, the false light tort remains puzzling due to its ambiguous parameters, unique elements, and potential utility.
How does Canadian tax law impact professional athletes? To understand this, we need to think about multiple scenarios, and consider the athlete’s residency, their affiliations with Canadian or foreign-based teams, and the ever-changing political landscape surrounding the taxation of sports franchises in Canada.
When your cargo or luggage gets damaged or lost during international air transport, you might think that the airline will compensate you for your losses. However, the legal landscape surrounding airline liability for international cargo and baggage is complex. It’s governed by international conventions like the Warsaw Convention and the Montreal Convention, which establish specific rules and liability limits for airlines.
The business judgment rule has its roots firmly planted in the need to facilitate an environment of innovation and growth in business. Recognizing that running a business often involves taking risks, this rule has been developed to shield directors and officers who are willing to take calculated chances to propel a corporation forward.
Civil fraud, also known as deceit, is a serious economic tort or civil wrong that involves a deliberate deception through false representation. It requires four elements: a false representation by the defendant, their knowledge (or recklessness) of the falsehood, the plaintiff’s action influenced by this representation, and a loss suffered by the plaintiff as a result.
When it is time to move from reading to resolving, Grigoras Law handles civil, commercial, and appellate matters across Ontario, and select cross-border files. The right counsel changes the calculation. For plaintiffs, that means a practical assessment of viable causes of action, a realistic view of recovery prospects, and a clear read on urgent interim relief if the facts support it. For defendants, it means pleadings assessed, defences triaged, and a strategy that keeps the file from consuming your business while it runs.
A contract has been breached, a partner has acted against your interests, a director has crossed a line, or money is at risk of disappearing. You want to understand what can be recovered, what urgent relief is available before trial, and whether the case is worth running.
Start plaintiff intake → Defendant intakeYou have been served with a statement of claim, an oppression application, or a demand that threatens proceedings. You need the pleadings assessed, the defences triaged, and a strategy that keeps the file from consuming your business while it runs.
Start defendant intake →