416-593-2485

Carlo has a varied civil litigation practice, with a particular focus on shareholder/corporate disputes, commercial litigation and regulatory law. He regularly acts for clients facing corporate and commercial litigation, including representing financial institutions with commercial disputes, clients in oppression remedy cases and contractual disputes regarding share purchase agreements. Carlo also acts for corporate directors and officers facing allegations of breach of fiduciary duty.

Carlo has significant expertise in class proceedings and in dealing with restrictive covenants and other employment law disputes.  He also acts in defamation matters and cases involving securities law.

In addition, Carlo has significant regulatory law experience.  He is currently counsel to uberX drivers facing Provincial Offences Act prosecutions brought by various municipalities.  He also has expertise in dealing with securities law, having appeared before the Ontario Securities Commission, as well as conducting independent investigations for various clients regarding securities law matters.

Carlo has appeared before all levels of courts, including the Ontario Court of Justice, the Superior Court of Justice, the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court of Canada.  He has appeared before various regulatory tribunals, including as a prosecutor before the former Ontario Racing Commission.

Carlo has a J.D. (Hons.) from the University of Toronto where he graduated in 2011.

 
Representative Work
  • Rizvee v Newman, 2017 ONSC 4024 – Represented a defendant facing a $17.5M defamation/malicious prosecution claim in one of the first cases to interpret the new anti-SLAPP legislation, the Protection of Public Participation Act.  Ultimately, the Court agreed to dismiss the defamation claim pursuant to this act.
  • Google Inc v Equustek Solutions Inc, 2017 SCC 34 – Represented British Columbia Civil Liberties Association at an intervention before the Supreme Court of Canada on a case that confirmed the availability of worldwide injunctions.
  • Pennyfeather v. Timminco Limited, 2017 ONCA 369 - Successfully represented Photon Consulting LLC and related parties at the Ontario Court of Appeal in the latest in the on-going saga in the Timminco Limited class action.  The decision was the first application of the test established by the Supreme Court in Green v CIBC for the availability of nunc pro tunc relief.
  • R v Bekele, [2016] OJ no 7056 – Represented uberX driver in case confirming that solicitor client privilege does not apply to communications between law enforcement and the prosecution regarding disclosure.  This case ultimately resulted in the withdrawal of all charges in “Project Snowball”, a high-profile Toronto Police investigation into Uber partners that led to charges under ss. 23 and 39.1 of the Highway Traffic Act.
  • Canada (Attorney General) v. Chambre des notaires du Québec, 2016 SCC 20;  Canada (National Revenue) v. Thompson, [2016] 1 SCR 381.  Represented the Criminal Lawyers’ Association in these appeals before the Supreme Court of Canada, arguing that various provisions under the Income Tax Act giving the Canada Revenue Agency access to information and documents potentially subject to solicitor-client privilege were unconstitutional.  In both cases, the Court’s reasoning was consistent with the positions advanced by the CLA.
  • Bancroft-Snell v. VISA Canada et al., 2016 ONCA 896 – Acted as amicus curiae in Court of Appeal decision that confirmed the scope of discretion judges have to approve or disallow fee sharing agreements and counsel’s fees in the class proceedings context.
  • Jones Collombin Investment Counsel Inc. v. Fickel, 2016 ONSC 6536 – Successfully represented client in summary judgment motion regarding the interpretation of a restrictive covenant in a share purchase agreement.  This decision as subsequently upheld on appeal (2017 ONCA 288).
  • Locking v. McCowan, 2015 ONSC 4435 – Represented former CEO of publicly traded real estate investment trust in one of the first decision to confirm that officers of investment trusts owe no direct duty to their unitholders.
  • Sugar et al v. MCAP Financial Corp. et al, 2015 ONSC 6360 – Successfully represented client in summary judgment motion dealing with application of Limitations Act, 2002.
Publications
  • Author, “The Re-emergence of a Clash of Rights”,  Supreme Court Law Review (2013), 63 SCLR (2d).
  • Author, “Coping with Coventree: Material or Not Material Remains the Question”, Corporate Liability, vol XVII, No. 2.
  • Author, “Formalism in Rights Remedies”, Charter and Human Rights Litigation (Volume XVIII, No. 2) by Federated Press.
  • Co-Author, “A Fine Balance Being Tipped – A Review of the OSC’s Public Interest Jurisdiction”, (2014) 18.3 Corporate Liability 1090 (with Jeffrey S. Leon).
  • Co-Author, “Several Recent Developments in U.S. M&A Litigation – Crossing the Border May Not be that Difficult”, (2013) 18.2 Corporate Liability 1079 (with Jeffrey S. Leon).
  • Co-Author, “The Re-emergence of a Clash of Rights”, (2013) 63(2d) Supreme Court Law Review 143 (with Ranjan K. Agarwal).
  • Co-Author, "Coping with Coventree: Material or Not Material Remains the Question", (2012) 17.2 Corporate Liability 1018 (with Jeffrey S. Leon).
  • Co-Author, "Formalism in Rights Remedies", (2012) 18.2 Charter and Human Rights Litigation 1524 (with Ranjan K. Agarwal).
Teaching & Speaking Engagements
  • Speaker, "Practical Commercial Law Perspectives on Summary Judgment Motion", Ontario Bar Association "Nuts and Bolts of Summary Judgment" (November 10, 2016)
  • Presenter, "No Easy Way Out: Managing the Tension Between Your Obligations to Disclose Documents and Your Client's Interest in Privacy", Ontario Bar Association conference "Divine Discoveries: Building a Great Case (YLD)" (With Jason Woycheshyn) (April 29, 2012)
Associations
  • Member, Canadian Bar Association

Languages
  • Italian

Back to Our Lawyers or contact us for more information.