Canadian Fraud Law

Canadian Fraud Law

Commentary, News and Updates

John Pirie

John Pirie

John Pirie leads the Firm’s Canadian Litigation and Government Enforcement Group and he is a member of the Steering Committee of the North American Litigation and Government Enforcement Group. He acts for clients in complex litigation and investigations. Mr. Pirie’s practice includes a significant fraud law and asset recovery component, often involving matters in the financial services industry. He routinely acts for our clients in coordination with other Baker McKenzie offices globally. Mr. Pirie has expertise concerning asset recovery strategies and emergency relief measures related to fraud, including Mareva injunctions, Anton Piller orders, Norwich Pharmacal orders, global asset tracing and fraudulent conveyance proceedings. Mr. Pirie has acted as lead counsel on an array of reported cases in this field, and he has been recognized in Lexpert’s Annual Guide to the Leading Canada/US Cross-Border Litigation Lawyers, and in the Legal 500 for Dispute Resolution (Canada). He appeared in the Supreme Court of Canada on a case ranked by Lexpert Magazine as Canada’s #1 business decision for 2007. Mr. Pirie has previously been named one of Lexpert’s Rising Stars, a “top 40” award that recognizes Canadian lawyers with an outstanding record of success.

Read John's bio on Baker & McKenzie's website

Subscribe to all posts by John Pirie

Deferred Prosecution Agreements are coming to Canada. Are you prepared?

Posted in Investigations & Compliance
Join Baker Mckenzie’s global practitioners on Thursday, June 14 for a Deferred Prosecution Agreement Roundtable to gain important insights on: The impact that Bill C-74 will have on corporate criminal law in Canada; How the Canadian DPA system (which will be known as the Remediation Agreement Regime) will work in practice and how it will impact the Integrity Regime; The critical lessons learned… Continue Reading

When Should a Defendant Bring a Motion for Summary Judgment in Fraud Proceedings?

Posted in Fraud and Insolvency Law, Fraud Prevention, Fraud Recovery
This is our third and final post on the complex fraud carried out by Norma and Ronald Walton, and the Ontario Court of Appeal decisions arising from their scheme. In our earlier posts, we focused on the use of a constructive trust as a remedy for breach of fiduciary duty and third party fraud liability.… Continue Reading

Constructive Trust as a Remedy for Breach of Fiduciary Duty: Court of Appeal Clarifies Test for Granting Proprietary Remedies

Posted in Fraud Recovery
This is our second of three posts on the Ontario Court of Appeal’s recent decision in DBDC Spadina Ltd. v. Walton 2018 ONCA 60 arising out of a complex fraud scheme perpetrated by Norma and Ronauld Walton. This post discusses the finding by the Court of Appeal that it was inappropriate for the application judge to… Continue Reading

Stranger Danger: When Companies associated with a Fraudster should be Liable for the Fraudster’s Breach of Fiduciary Duty

Posted in Fraud Recovery
The decision in DBDC Spadina Ltd. v. Walton, 2018 ONCA 60 provides insight on when corporations that are de facto under control of a fraudster can be held liable for claims of knowing assistance in the breach of fiduciary duty and knowing receipt of trust property. This is the first of three posts in which… Continue Reading

Sino-Forest OSC hearing opens

Posted in Fraud Recovery, Investment Fraud
On September 2, 2014, the Ontario Securities Commission commenced its high-profile hearing in the case of the Sino-Forest Corporation (“SFC“). SFC is alleged to have engaged in widespread fraud relating to its public financial disclosure. The specific allegations involve the fabrication or overestimation of revenue and assets, falsified evidence of ownership, backdated contracts, and undisclosed… Continue Reading

The OSC’s introduction of no-contest settlement proceedings

Posted in Fraud Recovery
In October 2011, the Ontario Securities Commission (“OSC“) raised the concept of offering no-contest settlements of the sort commonly employed by the US Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC“). On March 11th of this year, after receiving some sharply divided feedback in months of public hearings, the OSC announced that it was moving forward with the introduction… Continue Reading

Court approves gold-plated releases despite extensive fraud allegations

Posted in Fraud and Insolvency Law
Our team acted for one of the parties in Labourers’ Pension Fund of Central and Eastern Canada v. Sino-Forest Corporation, where Justice Morawetz of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice approved Ernst & Young LLP’s $117 million settlement relating to class action lawsuits commenced by jilted investors following the downfall of former stock market darling, Sino-Forest Corporation.  The… Continue Reading

Cybersecurity threats

Posted in Cybersecurity
Cybersecurity threats are evolving with ever-increasing levels of sophistication.  In the wake of a series of high profile data breaches, US President Obama recently commented that the nation’s “economic prosperity in the 21st Century will depend on cyber security”.  Without question, cybersecurity is now a global problem facing an array of companies, firms, organizations and… Continue Reading

How should a Court divide a shortfall of money among victims of a Ponzi Scheme

Posted in Fraud and Insolvency Law, Fraud Recovery, Investment Fraud
Dividing up a shortfall from a Ponzi scheme was first posed before the United States Supreme Court in 1924. The infamous case of Cunningham v. Brown dealt with the original Ponzi scheme of Charles Ponzi and distributing remaining funds back to victims when his investment scheme was finally unravelled, but left victims with only a fraction… Continue Reading