Thank you for joining us for Civil Banter. Tune in for more insightful discussions about all things civil litigation.

They also discuss the importance of identifying who owns the property, what evidence to gather immediately after a fall, and how tools like surveillance footage and weather data help establish what happened. The episode wraps with a clear explanation of negligence, contributory negligence, and the higher “gross negligence” standard that applies to municipalities.

Questions or ideas? Email: civilbanter@nelliganlaw.ca

Thank you for joining us for Civil Banter. Tune in for more insightful discussions about all things civil litigation.

Thank you for joining us for Civil Banter. Tune in for more insightful discussions about all things civil litigation.

Tune in to learn about solicitor-client privilege and its rare exceptions, how monetary limits work in Ontario courts, and why AI should be treated as a drafting aid rather than a replacement for legal judgment.

Thank you for joining us for Civil Banter. Tune in for more insightful discussions about all things civil litigation.

They cover:

• What surveillance actually looks like in practice (spoiler: it’s less James Bond and more hours of grocery store footage).
• When and why insurance companies hire private investigators.
• How surveillance evidence makes its way into court (and when it doesn’t).
• The difference between surveillance and social media evidence.
• Why juries may view surveillance with skepticism, and how it can sometimes backfire.

Listen now for all things civil litigation!

Thank you for joining us for Civil Banter. Tune in for more insightful discussions about all things civil litigation.

In this episode, civil litigators Hamish Mills-McEwan and Stanford Cummings dig into social host liability - the legal concept that asks whether party hosts (as opposed to bars or venues) can be held responsible when guests overindulge and something goes wrong.

They break down the leading Supreme Court of Canada case (Childs v. Desormeaux), explain the difference between social and commercial hosts, and explore how different facts lould shift legal responsibility.

Also covered:

- What the courts currently say about liability for house parties

- Why this area of law hasn’t changed much in almost 20 years

- How future cases or legislation could open the door to expanded liability

- Real-world examples and how “tweaking the facts” might affect outcomes

Thank you for joining us for Civil Banter. Tune in for more insightful discussions about all things civil litigation.

Whether you're a dog owner, a dog walker, a landlord, or someone who's been injured in a dog-related incident, Ontario’s Dog Owners’ Liability Act (DOLA) has specific rules that may apply to you. Hamish and Stanford unpack what "strict liability" really means, who qualifies as an "owner" under the law (hint: it’s broader than you might think), and how recent court decisions have shaped the interpretation of this legislation.

Plus, they answer some listener questions—like whether lawyers wear wigs in Canadian courtrooms—and recap Stanford’s recent adventure at Escapade 2025.

Thank you for joining us for Civil Banter. Tune in for more insightful discussions about all things civil litigation.

Topic: Civil Banter, Episode 7: Accident Benefits Bonanza – Part 2

In this follow-up to Part 1, Hamish and Stanford continue their deep dive into Ontario’s accident benefits system, this time exploring the key categories of benefits available to injured individuals after a motor vehicle accident. From treatment approvals to the role of occupational therapists, they walk through what these benefits look like in real life and how they actually get accessed.

They cover medical and rehabilitation benefits and explain what falls under the Minor Injury Guideline. They also take time to talk about pre-existing conditions, what “reasonable and necessary” treatment really means, and how to navigate the system when things aren’t straightforward.

A new segment makes its debut in this episode: You Auto Know, where Stanford tests Hamish on a real accident benefits case. The fact pattern? A cyclist, an oil slick, and the question of whether it qualifies as a motor vehicle accident under Ontario law. (Spoiler: it’s more complicated than you’d think.)

As always, the episode includes a dose of real life. Stanford shares highlights from a two-night Metallica concert in Toronto, while Hamish reflects on summer driving season and his love for six-speed manuals. It’s all part of the banter.

They close things out with a shout-out to Kevin Padley, who not only manages the Nelligators softball team but also delivers firm-wide, post-game recaps, and once wore the firm’s new mascot costume at a town hall.

Contact Information:

Email: civilbanter@nelliganlaw.ca

Social Media:

instagram.com/nelliganlaw

facebook.com/nelliganlaw

Thank you for joining us for Civil Banter. Tune in for more insightful discussions about all things civil litigation.

Topic: In this episode of Civil Banter, our hosts Hamish and Stan take a deep dive into the Ontario accident benefits system including how it works, who it applies to, and why it’s such a critical (and often overlooked) part of our insurance framework.

Our hosts explain how Ontario’s no-fault system ensures access to treatment and financial help regardless of who caused the crash. Whether you're a driver, cyclist, pedestrian, or passenger, you may be entitled to benefits like income replacement, caregiver support, or non-earner compensation.

This episode focuses on the basics: how to access benefits, what each type covers, and why the accident benefits system is often more valuable than the coverage on your car itself. Along the way, Hamish and Stan highlight the importance of optional coverage and understanding your policy before the unexpected happens.

Plus, in “The Reasonable Stan,” Stanford nails the damages award in a recent malpractice case, right down to the dollar.

Have a question about your rights after a car accident? Email the podcast at civilbanter@nelliganlaw.ca or reach out to the Nelligan Law team at info@nelliganlaw.ca.

Thank you for joining us for Civil Banter. Tune in for more insightful discussions about all things civil litigation.

Topic: In this episode of Civil Banter, Hamish and Stan break down a recent personal injury case where the plaintiff suffered an aggravated elbow injury in a parking lot collision. Stan takes a shot at estimating the jury’s award for general damages - and comes surprisingly close. They discuss how pre-existing conditions, treatment history, and the “threshold” test affect compensation in Ontario, and how statutory deductibles can dramatically reduce an award.

Later in the episode, the hosts dive into how virtual hearings have changed civil litigation. From access to justice and client savings to the loss of mentorship opportunities and hallway negotiations, Hamish and Stan explore what’s gained (and what’s lost) when court goes online.

They wrap up with a call for more intentional learning in the virtual era and a few shoutouts, including to the office building they call home.

For questions, guest ideas, or feedback, email civilbanter@nelliganlaw.ca. Subscribe wherever you get your podcasts.

Contact Information:

Email: civilbanter@nelliganlaw.ca

Social Media:

instagram.com/nelliganlaw

facebook.com/nelliganlaw

Thank you for joining us for Civil Banter. Tune in for more insightful discussions about all things civil litigation.

Topic: In this technical but timely episode of Civil Banter, Hamish and Stanford explore the evolving world of prejudgment interest in civil litigation. With the help of two recent Ontario Court of Appeal decisions, they break down what prejudgment interest really means, why it matters, and how it’s calculated, especially in personal injury cases. The episode also touches on how these changes might shape litigation strategy and access to justice going forward.

What You'll Learn

• What prejudgment interest is, why it exists, and how it compensates plaintiffs for the delay between injury and judgment.
• The legal framework governing prejudgment interest, including sections of the Courts of Justice Act and related case law.
• How judicial discretion impacts the application of interest rates and the potential risks and rewards for plaintiffs and defendants.
• Why two Court of Appeal decisions, Zaitlen and Aubin, are now essential reading for civil litigators.
• How real-world investment returns are starting to influence judicial decisions about fairness in compensation.

Discussion Points

Small But Big Changes

Hamish and Stanford kick things off by discussing recent changes to how prejudgment interest is awarded in personal injury cases. They explain why these seemingly small percentage differences can have massive impacts on final awards and legal strategy.

Zaitlen Case Breakdown

A medical malpractice case that hinged on whether the statutory 5% interest rate was fair in light of historically low Bank of Canada rates. The Court of Appeal upheld the 5% default, citing a lack of compelling evidence to deviate.

Aubin Case Breakdown

In contrast, the Court of Appeal upped the prejudgment interest rate to 8.46% based on strong evidence that the plaintiff could have earned that return. This ruling could open the door to more in-depth financial evidence being introduced in future personal injury trials.

Legal Context and Risk

Hamish and Stan explore the balancing act between certainty and judicial discretion, and how these decisions may affect discovery, expert evidence, and client expectations. Is a simple 5% rule better for justice, or just efficiency?

LARPing Segment (Lawyers Are Real People-ing)

Stan shares his recent Tarantino rewatch and Hamish recommends The Prestige. While their movie tastes differ, both use film as a way to decompress from the heavy cognitive load of litigation.

Contact Information:

Email: civilbanter@nelliganlaw.ca

Social Media:

instagram.com/nelliganlaw

facebook.com/nelliganlaw

Thanks for tuning into Episode 4 of Civil Banter. Whether you’re a lawyer, law student, or someone curious about how civil law actually works, this episode will help you understand how even abstract topics like interest rates can deeply influence access to justice. Join Hamish and Stan next time as they continue to tackle tough legal issues and share what’s on their screens when court’s out.

Thank you for joining us for Civil Banter. Tune in for more insightful discussions about all things civil litigation.

Topic: Dive into the intricacies of civil law with Hamish and Stanford, associate lawyers at Nelligan Law, in this engaging episode of Civil Banter. This episode delves into the intersection of personal interests with professional legal practice, featuring discussions on ancient history, AI technology, and personal injury law.

What You'll Learn

• The complexities of establishing causation in personal injury cases through a detailed discussion on 'Kidane vs. the City of Toronto'. Understand the critical analysis required to link incidents to injuries in court.
• The pivotal role of causation in personal injury litigation and the challenges lawyers face, especially when external factors like pre-existing conditions might obscure causal links.
• Insights into the judicial processes and legal reasoning that influence the outcomes of complex personal injury cases and how these cases are navigated through the court system.
• How personal interests such as history and AI technology provide a personal retreat and enrich professional practice, offering new perspectives and tools to seasoned lawyers like Hamish and Stan.

Discussion Points

Navigating Complex Legal Waters: Detailed analysis of 'Kidane vs. the City of Toronto,' highlighting the intricacies of personal injury law.

Community Engagement: Discussion on the significance of the Lawyers Play and the role of Nelligan Law in supporting community activities and professional growth through student recruitment.

Personal Interests and Professional Insights: Exploration of how Stan’s interest in the Roman Empire and Hamish’s thoughts on AI reflect on their professional lives.

Integration of AI in Daily Life: How Hamish uses AI like ChatGPT to streamline cooking processes, demonstrating the practical applications of technology.

Contact Information:

Email: civilbanter@nelliganlaw.ca

Social Media:

instagram.com/nelliganlaw

facebook.com/nelliganlaw

Thank you for joining us for Civil Banter. Tune in for more insightful discussions about all things civil litigation.

What You'll Learn

• The details of a complex family and contract law case involving the enforceability of contracts and the appeals process.
• Insights into how personal interests, like virtual reality, movies, and Formula 1 racing, influence and provide relief from the demanding world of legal practice.
• The importance of collegiality in the legal profession, especially in adversarial settings, and how relationships within the legal community contribute to professional practice.
• An understanding of how personal passions can enrich professional lives, illustrated by the hosts' hobbies and interests.

Discussion Points

Introduction to the Episode: This episode offers an in-depth look at a compelling case study in family and contract law. The discussion emphasizes the case's complexity and its educational value for legal professionals.

Navigating Complex Legal Waters: Hamish and Stanford provide a detailed analysis of the 'Gill and Gill saga.' They discuss the legal challenges faced during the trial and appeal processes, emphasizing strategic decisions and the outcome's impact on their legal practices. Key points include the enforceability of contracts among family members and the nuances of appealing a trial decision.

A Sense of Community in Law: The episode highlights the sense of collegiality within the legal profession, especially in Eastern Ontario and Ottawa. The hosts discuss their positive interactions with opposing counsel, demonstrating the professional respect that underpins effective legal practice.

Critical Legal Insights: Learned specific legal principles discussed in the episode, such as the rules of civil procedure, contract enforceability, and the specifics of obtaining specific performance in contract disputes. This segment aims to educate listeners on important legal concepts and their application in real-world scenarios.

LARPing Segment (Lawyers Are Real People-ing): A brief touch on personal interests where Stan shares his experience with indoor golf, showcasing how lawyers find balance between their demanding professional roles and personal hobbies.

Contact Information:

Email: civilbanter@nelliganlaw.ca

Social Media:

instagram.com/nelliganlaw

facebook.com/nelliganlaw

Thank you for joining us for Civil Banter. Tune in for more insightful discussions about all things civil litigation.

What You'll Learn

• The roles and responsibilities of associate lawyers specializing in civil litigation, personal injury, and insurance law at Nelligan Law.
• How general damages are calculated in Canada, the factors influencing these calculations, and the contrast with the U.S. legal system.
• The significance of adjusting compensation for inflation and how historical caps affect current litigation outcomes.
• Techniques and personal hobbies of lawyers that help them unwind, such as building Lego models and knife sharpening.
• How subjective experiences of pain and objective legal assessments intersect in the valuation of personal injury claims.

Discussion Points

Introduction of Hosts and Their Practices: Hamish and Stanford discuss their roles at Nelligan Law, focusing on injuries, insurance, and civil litigation.

LARPing Segment (Lawyers Are Real People-ing): The hosts share personal anecdotes about their hobbies and interests outside the courtroom, including Hamish’s attempt to build a Lego replica of Kevin McCallister's house from Home Alone and Stanford’s newfound interest in knife sharpening.

One Thing to Rule Them All: This segment delves into a detailed discussion on general damages in civil litigation. The hosts explore the concept of general damages, its implications for clients, and the differences in compensation between the U.S. and Canada. They discuss the historical and current perspectives on cap limits and the reality of how these limits impact claimants.

Reasonable Stan: A playful, educational segment where Stanford tries to assess general damages based on a recent case scenario provided by Hamish, highlighting the challenges and subjective nature of determining appropriate compensation for injuries.

Shout-Outs: The episode concludes with shout-outs to their articling students and a reminder of the importance of participating in provincial elections, emphasizing the impact of political decisions on the civil justice system.

Social Media:

instagram.com/nelliganlaw

facebook.com/nelliganlaw

Thank you for joining us for Civil Banter. Tune in for more insightful discussions about all things civil litigation.