Meet Jason Squire
Appeals Lawyer"Counsel on an appeal has to be at least as pragmatic and practical as at a trial, arbitration, application."
Professional Highlights
- Partner, Lerners LLP (August, 2008 to present)
- Partner, Hodgson Shields DesBrisay O’Donnell MacKillop Squire LLP (May, 2004 to August, 2008)
- Associate lawyer, Hodgson Tough Shields DesBrisay O’Donnell (1999 to 2004)
- Completed articles clerking for the Office of the Chief Justice, Superior Court of Justice (Toronto, including for the Commercial List) (1998-1999)
- Business and Contractual Disputes
- Administrative and Public Law, Tribunals and Commissions
- Employment and Fiduciary Litigation
- Shareholder Disputes
- Directors’ and Officers’ Liability
- Commercial Arbitrations
- Professional Negligence and Discipline (Preferred Counsel for LawPro)
- Product Liability Litigation
- Defamation
- Constitutional and Charter Challenges and Remedies
- Enforcement of Foreign Awards and Judgments
- Securities Investment Dealer, Financial Advisor Negligence, and Discipline
- Acting for the New York Stock Exchange, on the recognition and enforcement of a multi-million dollar arbitration award against a Canadian company who underpaid market data fees.
- Re Hollinger: Acting in the Hollinger Inc. CCAA litigation, and in defence of Hollinger Inc.’s claims against its former directors and officers; issues on appeal recently have included the propriety of third party releases (or “bar orders”) to effect partial settlement of claims, and the use of sealing orders to redact documents in the publicly-available court file.
- ACTIV Financial Systems v. Orbixa: successful recognition and enforcement of US arbitral award and judgment in Ontario.
- Royal Laser v. Cassels Brock: Acted for a law firm in a claim arising out of an M&A transaction; allegations concerned whether there was due consideration given to a large contingent liability represented by existing litigation; successfully disposed of the action on summary judgment.
- Rutherford v. Swanick: pleadings motion, upheld on appeal, permitting a claim over by a trustee and lawyer against a party enjoying the benefit of a release.
- Noori v. Abdin: successfully compelled an election within a charitable organization that operates a mosque; the board of directors was entirely replaced.
- Pattison Outdoor Advertising v. City of Toronto: Acting for one of Canada’s largest outdoor media companies, seeking to quash Toronto’s new billboard sign tax. Issues include the constitutional authority of a municipality to charge an indirect tax, and discrimination at municipal law.
- DeWolf v. Bell ExpressVu: Acted for Bell ExpressVu in a class action brought by subscribers charged administration fees for late payment of accounts; the plaintiff claims the fees amount to interest at a criminal rate. The Court of Appeal granted summary judgment and dismissed the class action: the administrative fees charged by Bell ExpressVu were found not to constitute interest, and instead, to be fees which are, in substance, a reimbursement to Bell ExpressVu of administration costs and, as such, not a charge “paid or payable for the advancing of credit”. The Supreme Court of Canada refused leave to appeal.
- Poulin v. Ford and Magna: Acted for Ford in a putative class action brought with respect to allegedly defective door latches in over 300,000 trucks. The plaintiff’s motion for certification was defeated, and the motions judge ordered the U.S. law firm he found was underwriting the litigation to pay costs on a substantial indemnity scale. An appeal to the Divisional Court on the merits was dismissed; the appeal on the costs issue was allowed.
- Ford v. OMERS: Acted for Ford of Canada and Ford Motor Company in a Commercial List trial, appeal and Supreme Court of Canada leave application in a complex minority shareholder claim arising out of Ford Motor Company’s compulsory acquisition of Ford of Canada’s publicly traded shares. Issues included the appropriateness of Ford’s North American transfer pricing regime between 1965 and 1995; the application of the business judgment rule to the board of directors of a publicly-traded subsidiary; the valuation of the Ford entity in Canada, Australia and New Zealand; the ability of shareholders to claim the oppression remedy for periods prior to their ownership of shares; and the application of the Limitations Act to oppression remedy claims.
- Benchmark Canada, Litigation Star (2015-2020) - Recognized in the following areas: Class Actions and Commercial (2015-2020); Dispute Resolution (2020)
- Recognized and selected by peers for inclusion in “The Best Lawyers in Canada” for Alternative Dispute Resolution, Appellate Practice, and Corporate and Commercial Litigation
- Benchmark Canada inaugural edition (2012), 2013 and 2014: Future litigation star
- Litigator to Watch – 2011 Lexpert Guide to the Leading US/Canada Cross-Border Litigation Lawyers in Canada
- Named a Rising Star by Lexpert – one of Canada’s Leading Lawyers Under 40
- Panellist, “Evidence for Litigators”, Osgoode Professional Development, October 2012
- Co-Director and Faculty Instructor, “The Expert Witness”, The Osgoode – IPTI Certificate for Expert Evidence in Property Valuation Disputes, 2011 and 2012
- “Non-competition agreements rarely pay off”, The Lawyers Weekly, May 22, 2009
- “Poulin highlights role of U.S. counsel”, Law Times, April 6/13, 2009
- Law Society of Upper Canada
- The Advocates’ Society
- Toronto Commercial Arbitration Society
- Toronto Lawyers Association
- Canadian Bar Association
- Feb 2000, Called to the Ontario Bar – In the Bar Admission Course, attained the highest grade in Civil Litigation
- 1998, LL.B., University of Victoria – Participated in UVic Law’s unique co-op program, completing work terms in Victoria, Vancouver and Wellington, New Zealand
- 1994, Hon. B.A., University of Toronto – Specialist in Sociology and Urban Studies; Graduated with Distinction
Insights
-
Now for Then or Never – An Action Commenced While the Plaintiff Was a Bankrupt Cannot Be Revived After the 2 Year Limitation Period Expires
- Appeals
-
The BFF is Your BFF for Contractual Interpretation
- Appeals,
- Dispute Resolution and Advocacy
-
When are employees entitled to bonuses after they’ve been terminated? A Review of the Supreme Court’s Recent Decision in Matthews v. Ocean Nutrition Canada Ltd.
- Appeals
-
Heller v. Uber in the SCC, Part 3: The Unconscionability Doctrine Clarified or Confounded
- Appeals
-
Reconciling Inconsistencies: A Summary of Fuller v. Aphria Inc., 2020 ONCA 403
- Appeals
-
Heller v Uber in the SCC: Arbitrations, Employment, Unconscionability and Class Actions
- Arbitration,
- Plaintiff Class Actions,
- Defence Class Actions,
- Appeals,
- Dispute Resolution and Advocacy,
- Business Law
Contact
- Phone:
- 416.601.2369
- Fax:
- 416.867.2404