Canadian Civil Liberties Association

Acted for the Canadian Civil Liberties Association as intervener in S.L. v. Commission scolaire des Chênes, in which the Supreme Court of Canada had to decide the circumstances under which parents may request that their children be excused from attending mandatory classes on the basis that they interfere with their freedom of religion.

BCE Inc.

Acted for BCE Inc. and Bell Canada in a successful appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada in a landmark commercial case involving the proposed $51.7 billion privatization of BCE. The decision of the Supreme Court in this case set the standard in Canada for approval of plans of arrangement and claims of oppression. It also clarified the law concerning the duties of directors of public companies faced with potential change of control transactions. This case also resulted in the fastest commercial appeal ever heard by the Supreme Court of Canada. The appeal was heard by the Court and decided unanimously in favour of BCE less than 30 days after BCE launched its application for leave to appeal from a decision of the Québec Court of Appeal revoking approval for BCE's proposed plan of arrangement that had been granted by Justice Silcoff of the Quebec Superior Court following a lengthy and highly expedited trial.

Ludco Enterprises Ltd.

Acted for Ludco Enterprises Ltd. in its successful challenge of federal income tax assessments in relation to the issue of deductibility of interest on borrowed money used to purchase shares (before the Tax Court of Canada, the Federal Court of Canada, the Federal Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court of Canada).

Concordia University

Acted successfully for Concordia University in the Bisaillon v. Concordia University case before the Supreme Court of Canada. Davies argued that the Superior Court had no jurisdiction to entertain a class action initiated by Bisaillon claiming the payment by Concordia of well over $100 million to the pension fund of its employees.

Canadian Chamber of Commerce

Acted successfully on behalf of the Canadian Chamber of Commerce in favour of Wal-Mart before the Supreme Court of Canada in an appeal concerning the scope of the employer's right to cease operations, even where the alleged reason for the business closure was the employer's unwillingness to deal with a union that had recently obtained certification of the workplace. The majority of the Supreme Court held that although anti-union animus could, in principle, constitute the basis for awarding compensation under the unfair labour practice provisions of the Québec Labour Code, the wrongful dismissal provisions assumed the continued existence of a workplace.

Confidential Client

Acting for a confidential client, as an innocent third party in an investigation, led by the Québec's permanent anti-corruption unit (PACU).

Beauward Real Estate inc., Schokbeton Québec Inc. and Saramac

Acted successfully for Beauward Real Estate inc., Schokbeton Québec Inc. and Saramac on a challenge of search warrants and communication orders issued by a judge and executed in multiple locations by the Agence du revenu du Québec as part of the Permanent Anti-Corruption Unit of Québec.

Confidential Individuals

Acting on behalf of confidential clients in a challenge of multiple search warrants executed in multiple locations by the Québec's Revenue Agency.

Mario Montminy et al.

Successfully represented Mario Montminy and others at the Federal Court of Appeal against the Canada Revenue Agency in a stock option deduction dispute. The court sided with the taxpayers on the eligibility of their deductions.

Private Equity Firm

Representing a private equity group before the Tax Court of Canada in connection with a dispute involving foreign exchange forward contracts in what is commonly referred to as "straddle" trading undertaken by a substantial number of taxpayers.

Via Rail Canada Inc.

Acting for Via Rail Canada Inc. in connection with a fuel tax dispute with the Canada Revenue Agency.

Estate of Paul G. Desmarais

Acted for the estate of Paul G. Desmarais in connection with proceedings instituted by the late Louis R. Desmarais. The plaintiff claimed from the estate of his late brother, Paul G. Desmarais, the sum of $75 million on the basis of a promise allegedly made orally in the late 1970s to return shares of Power Corporation of Canada. On April 26, 2017, after the trial and while the case was under advisement, the plaintiff dropped the proceedings in their entirety.

Glen French

Successfully acted for Glen French before the Federal Court of Appeal in a case involving charitable donations, and specifically how the Québec civil law informs the meaning of the word "gift" in the Income Tax Act across Canada. The case is serving as a representative case (either officially or de facto) for over 300 other appeals before the Tax Court of Canada concerning leveraged donations.

Michael Rosenberg

Acted successfully for Michael Rosenberg before the Federal Court of Canada ("FCC") in an application for judicial review in regards to a demand letter sent by the Canada Revenue Agency ("CRA") pursuant to section 231.1 of the Income Tax Act. The application sought the enforcement of a settlement agreement entered into with the CRA at the conclusion of an extensive audit. The CRA argued that the settlement agreement should be repudiated as no agreement could bar the Minister of National Revenue ("Minister") from conducting another audit of previously audited taxation years. In quashing the demand letter, the FCC found that the settlement agreement was binding on the Minister and required the CRA to comply with the terms therein.

4032799 Canada Inc et al.

Successfully represented the developers of the Bell Campus on Nun's Island, Montréal, in a dispute with the Canada Revenue Agency before the Tax Court of Canada involving the proposed application of the general anti-avoidance rule.

J.G. Guy Simard et al.

Acted for Colonel J.G. Guy Simard (retired) and other taxpayers who participated in the "Synergy Program", a program designed to provide funding for start-up businesses, in their dispute before the Tax Court of Canada with the Canada Revenue Agency over the deductibility of related losses. The appeals served as de facto representative cases for approximately 4000 other taxpayers who contested potentially over two hundred million dollars in tax deductions.