Resource Library

This article discusses the real issues related to litigating aboriginal and treaty rights cases in Canada.

Employers’ should be aware of the brave, committed, yet sniffling, sick, and ultimately contagious worker who has the flu and chooses to come to work. An employer has a duty under the Occupational Health and Safety Act1 (the “OHSA”) to “take every precaution reasonable in the circumstances for the protection of a worker” (s 25(2)(h)). Permitting a sick employee to continue working may compromise your duties to your other staff. It may also subject your company to financial liability under the OHSA and unwanted inspections by the Ministry of Labour. Flu season is in full swing and if you do not take preventative measures to protect your workers from an illness in your workplace, your workers may take matters into their own hands.

Material Adverse Change clauses are common in credit agreements, but are rarely interpreted by the courts. This article reviews cases when a lender’s knowledge of pre-existing financial circumstances at the time of granting credit is considered when assessing whether a material change has occurred.

This guide reviews applicable legislation to insolvencies and reorganizations in Peru.

A recent trio of hotly contested proxy fights in Canada involving Norton Rose Fulbright’s Special Situations team helped further clarify and define the rights of a board of directors to determine the timing of a shareholders' meeting.

The Anti-Corruption Law entered into force in Brazil last month. Under the new law, parent companies, subsidiaries, other affiliates and consortiums are jointly and severally liable for payment of fines and indemnification of damages resulting from unlawful acts. Read this article for further discussion of the main matters covered by the new law.

Brazilian law requires arbitrators to state the reasons for their respective decisions. Failure to do so may result in annulment of the arbitral award. Learn more about recent opinions rendered by the Sao Paulo appellate court that shed some light on how much reasoning arbitrators are required to give in their awards.

You are an American company expanding its business into China. You have just clinched a highly coveted multi-million-dollar deal, documented in a one hundred-page contract that seems to cover every conceivable hiccup. But that lucrative deal, which took months to close, may not be as airtight as you imagine. If a dispute arises between your company and your Chinese business partner, how can you resolve it? The Chinese business may have assets in China, but again it is difficult to enforce a US judgment in China: The two superpowers do not yet have reciprocal arrangements to recognize judgments from each other’s courts. This article explains how to manage and resolve disputes in China, and, where possible, avoid them altogether.

Foreign companies doing business in China have focused in recent days on the case of GlaxoSmithKline (“GSK”), the British multinational producer of pharmaceuticals, biologics, vaccines and consumer healthcare products headquartered in London. Articles to date, however, have been more descriptive than analytical and have focused more on the alleged acts and potential implications for the individuals allegedly involved and not as much on potential exposure for the corporate entities and those corporate officers who were not directly involved in actions violating PRC law. This article addresses those points while also placing the case in the broader context of China today.

Saudi Arabia continues to present amongst the best opportunities for investment for companies from outside the Kingdom, not only in oil and gas but also in the industrial and infrastructure sectors, as the economy is diversified. The biggest projects are awarded by government bodies. Their contracts are increasingly likely to contain Saudi arbitration clauses. The objective of this note is to answer the questions that would typically be asked when a company from outside Saudi Arabia negotiating a contract with a Saudi party is asked to agree to arbitration in Saudi Arabia under the new Saudi Arbitration Law.