Roundup of law firm resources on COVID-19: August 21 update

This week’s update on resources shared by law firms addressing the COVID-19 crisis

Roundup of law firm resources on COVID-19: August 21 update

Law firms across Canada are sharing their insights on how to deal with the rapidly evolving economic and legal landscape due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Below is a roundup of some of these resources.

Gowling WLG

In “Supreme Court of Canada COVID-19 update: End of the suspension period,” Gowlings gives an update on the Supreme Court of Canada’s resumption of deadlines which were previously suspended in light of the public health crisis.

In “Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy (CEWS) Redesigned: Flexibility and Relief for Employers in the Months Ahead,” Stikeman Elliott summarizes the important changes to the subsidy program that supports employers affected by the pandemic.

Other resources:

McCarthy Tétrault LLP

In “The Nominee-Director Dilemma,” McCarthy Tétrault gives a refresher on the duties, responsibilities and liabilities of nominee directors and investors in the context of the COVID-19 crisis.

Other resources:

In “COVID-19 & the Use of Force Majeure in Northern Canada,” Lawson Lundell discusses force majeure clauses in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and its effects on travel restrictions.

Other resources:

Langlois lawyers, LLP

In “New investment opportunities for French and other foreign investors in Quebec,” Langlois describes how the COVID-19 crisis has affected the business and economic landscape in Quebec and what this means for foreign investors in the province.

Other resources:

Field Law

In “COVID-19 and the Impact on the Cannabis Industry,” Field Law sheds light on how the public health crisis has affected cannabis businesses in Alberta.

Other resources:

Lerners LLP

In “Court orders are not ‘suggestions’ or ‘guidelines’ - even during a pandemic,” Lerners considers a recent case suggesting that courts may not readily forgive non-compliance for COVID-19-related reasons if the explanation is not supported by sufficient evidence.