Not Just Lawyers. Every Practice Area Under One Roof.
Six disciplines. One accountable team. Every client is matched with the right lawyer for their matter.
LawyersParalegalsImmigrationReal Estate
02 | Our Services
Full-Spectrum Legal & Advisory Under One Roof.
From courtroom litigation to Fractional GC retainers to international market entry.
LitigationReal EstateFractional GCImmigration
03 | Who We Are
The Cases Others Won't Take Are Exactly Why We Exist.
Founded on the conviction that the quality of your legal representation should have nothing to do with the size of your retainer.
TorontoOntario & Alberta13 Languages
04 | Legal Professionals
A Private Consortium Built on Real Partnership.
Two-way referrals, co-counsel access, CPD sessions, mentorship and exclusive events.
LSO CompliantMobile AppCo-Counsel
05 | Insights
Law Is Always Moving. Stay Ahead of It.
Legal updates, firm news, webinar invitations, and award announcements.
Family LawEmploymentReal EstateEvents
◆ | Our Offices
Where Law Meets Your Community.
Four GTA locations. Walk-in consultations. Weekend appointments.
TorontoMississaugaNorth YorkOakville
◆ | Tools & Resources
Know Your Rights Before You Spend a Dollar.
Free calculators, downloadable guides, and legal checklists, built by our lawyers for real Ontario situations.
12 Calculators17 GuidesFree Access
Immigration Judicial Reviews
IRCC officers and IRB members make thousands of decisions every year. When those decisions are wrong in law or fact, the Federal Court provides a vital check on administrative power.
Holding immigration decision-makers to account through rigorous Federal Court litigation.
Immigration Judicial Review Track Record
24hr
Urgent Filing Capability
50+
Decision Types Challenged
Quick Answer
What types of immigration decisions can be judicially reviewed?
Almost any decision made under IRPA or the Citizenship Act is subject to judicial review by the Federal Court. This includes visa refusals, work permit denials, study permit refusals, sponsorship refusals, permanent residence application refusals, refugee claim decisions, removal orders, detention decisions, and citizenship refusals. The decision must be final in nature, meaning internal administrative remedies should generally be exhausted first.
Tell us briefly what is going on. A lawyer reviews every enquiry and replies within 24 hours on business days.
We will use these details to reply to your enquiry. Privacy Policy.
A lawyer replies within 24 hours on business days. Urgent? Call +1 416 333 6200, answered 24/7. Submitting this form does not create a solicitor-client relationship.
Your Legal Team
Lawyers and Regulated Canadian Immigration Consultants (CICC)
Work permits, permanent residence, sponsorship, refugee claims and appeals
IRCC DECISION REVIEWS
Challenging Officer Refusals and Denials
Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) officers exercise broad discretionary powers over temporary resident visas, study permits, work permits, permanent residence applications, and citizenship grants. When an officer refuses an application, the decision is subject to judicial review under the Vavilov reasonableness standard. Our lawyers obtain and analyze the officer's Global Case Management System (GCMS) notes to determine whether the reasoning discloses a reviewable error.
Common grounds for challenging IRCC decisions include: the officer failed to consider evidence that was squarely before them; the officer applied an incorrect legal test (for example, requiring proof beyond a reasonable doubt rather than a balance of probabilities); the officer drew unreasonable inferences from the evidence; or the officer engaged in speculative reasoning unsupported by the record. Under Vavilov, a decision that fails to grapple with key submissions or evidence is unreasonable.
We regularly challenge refusals of spousal sponsorship applications under section 12 of IRPA, Express Entry refusals under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations (IRPR), SOR/2002-227, visitor visa refusals where dual intent was improperly assessed, and citizenship refusals under the Citizenship Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-29.
IRB TRIBUNAL REVIEWS
Reviewing Decisions of the Immigration and Refugee Board
The Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB) is Canada's largest independent administrative tribunal, comprising four divisions: the Refugee Protection Division (RPD), the Refugee Appeal Division (RAD), the Immigration Division (ID), and the Immigration Appeal Division (IAD). Decisions of each division are subject to judicial review by the Federal Court with leave under section 72 of IRPA.
For RPD and RAD decisions, we analyze whether the tribunal properly applied the definition of "Convention refugee" under section 96 of IRPA or "person in need of protection" under section 97. Errors frequently arise in the assessment of credibility, the treatment of country condition evidence, the application of the internal flight alternative (IFA) test established in Rasaratnam v. Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration), [1992] 1 FC 706 (CA), and the analysis of nexus to a Convention ground.
For IAD decisions, including sponsorship appeals under section 63 and removal order appeals under section 67, we assess whether the tribunal properly weighed the factors in Ribic v. Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration), [1985] IABD No. 4, as endorsed by the Federal Court of Appeal in Chieu v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2002 SCC 3. These factors include the seriousness of the offence, the possibility of rehabilitation, the length of time in Canada, family ties, and the best interests of any affected child.
PROCEDURAL FAIRNESS
When the Process Fails You
Procedural fairness is a cornerstone of Canadian administrative law. The duty of fairness, as articulated in Baker v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [1999] 2 SCR 817, requires that decision-makers provide notice of the case to be met, an opportunity to respond, an unbiased decision-maker, reasons for the decision, and an adequate right of appeal. Breaches of procedural fairness are reviewed on a correctness standard, even after Vavilov.
Our immigration judicial review practice frequently identifies procedural fairness breaches including: failure to disclose adverse evidence obtained from external sources; reliance on extrinsic evidence not shared with the applicant; inadequate interpretation services at hearings; failure to provide a meaningful opportunity to respond to credibility concerns; and institutional bias or reasonable apprehension of bias. The Federal Court has consistently held that a breach of procedural fairness renders a decision void, regardless of whether the outcome might have been the same.
We also challenge the adequacy of reasons provided by decision-makers. While IRCC officers are not always required to provide extensive reasons, the Federal Court in Komolafe v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2013 FC 431, held that officers must provide sufficient reasons to allow the applicant to understand why the application was refused and to permit meaningful judicial review. Bare assertions and boilerplate language do not satisfy this requirement.
CASE SPOTLIGHT
Recent Victory: Mîra v. Canada
Mîra v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2026 FC 603 In this Federal Court judicial review, Jia Junaid of Lexaltico LLP successfully challenged the Refugee Appeal Division’s decision to exclude the applicants from refugee protection under Article 1F(b) of the Refugee Convention.
Justice McHaffie found the RAD’s decision unreasonable on two grounds: the RAD improperly excluded new evidence about corruption within Romania’s National Anticorruption Directorate (DNA), and the RAD’s exclusion analysis relied on foreign convictions without meaningfully grappling with the applicants’ credible evidence that the charges were politically fabricated.
The application for judicial review was allowed. The Federal Court set aside the decision and remitted the appeal to a differently constituted panel, which is the relief sought on judicial review: the exclusion finding no longer stands and the appeal is heard afresh.
Article 1F(b) exclusions are hard to displace, and harder still where the conviction comes from a European Union member state with a functioning court system. The argument required persuading the Court that evidence of corruption inside the prosecuting authority was relevant and had been wrongly shut out, and that a conviction from such a state could not simply be taken at face value.
What made the exclusion unusual. The Minister raised Article 1F(b) in 2020 and then withdrew that intervention in October 2023 after reviewing the evidence. The Refugee Protection Division found our client generally credible and not excluded. The Refugee Appeal Division then raised exclusion on its own motion and excluded her, without the Minister intervening. The finding under review was one the Minister had already abandoned.
On the exclusion itself, the Division reasoned that a conviction from Romania could be relied on because it is a country where the rule of law prevails, citing Arevalo Pineda for that proposition but not the passages of the same decision requiring an objective assessment of the claimant’s own evidence and satisfaction that the issuing authority itself respects the rule of law. The Court held that reliance on authority stripped of its qualifying context does not meet the standard, and observed that no assessment of the issuing authority was ever carried out. Read the full decision on CanLII.
This result demonstrates Lexaltico’s commitment to thorough preparation, evidence-driven advocacy, and holding administrative decision-makers to the standard of reasonableness the law requires.
Key Details
CaseMîra v. Canada
Citation2026 FC 603
CourtFederal Court of Canada
JudgeJustice McHaffie
CounselJia Junaid, Lexaltico LLP
ResultJudicial review allowed, exclusion set aside
What types of immigration decisions can be judicially reviewed?
Almost any decision made under IRPA or the Citizenship Act is subject to judicial review by the Federal Court. This includes visa refusals, work permit denials, study permit refusals, sponsorship refusals, permanent residence application refusals, refugee claim decisions, removal orders, detention decisions, and citizenship refusals. The decision must be final in nature, meaning internal administrative remedies should generally be exhausted first.
How do I obtain the officer's notes (GCMS notes) for my case?
You can submit an Access to Information and Privacy (ATIP) request to IRCC to obtain your GCMS notes, which contain the officer's detailed assessment of your application. Processing times vary but typically range from 30 to 90 days. Since the deadline to file a judicial review is only 15 days for in-Canada decisions, our lawyers prepare the initial application based on the refusal letter and supplement the record with GCMS notes once obtained.
Can I submit new evidence on judicial review?
Generally, no. Judicial review is based on the record that was before the original decision-maker. The Federal Court may admit new evidence only in narrow circumstances, such as to establish a procedural fairness breach, to demonstrate that the decision-maker relied on extrinsic evidence not disclosed to the applicant, or to provide general background information. Affidavit evidence on judicial review is limited to what is necessary to understand the issues.
What is the difference between an appeal and a judicial review?
An appeal allows a higher body to substitute its own decision for the original one, often with the ability to consider new evidence. A judicial review is more limited: the court examines whether the decision was legally sound but does not re-weigh the evidence or substitute its own findings. If a judicial review succeeds, the court typically sends the matter back for a new decision rather than deciding the application itself.
Can I file a judicial review of a decision made at a Canadian visa office abroad?
Yes. Decisions made by visa officers at Canadian embassies, high commissions, and consulates abroad are subject to judicial review by the Federal Court. The filing deadline is 60 days from the date you receive the refusal, as provided by section 72(2)(b) of IRPA. The application is filed in Canada and proceeds through the same leave process as in-Canada decisions.
What are certified questions in immigration judicial review?
Under section 74(d) of IRPA, a judge may certify a "serious question of general importance" arising from a judicial review. Certification is the only route to appeal a Federal Court judicial review decision to the Federal Court of Appeal. Without a certified question, the Federal Court's decision is final. Our lawyers identify potential certifiable questions early in the process to preserve appellate options.
Will I need to attend a hearing at the Federal Court?
The leave stage is decided on the papers without an oral hearing. If leave is granted, an oral hearing is scheduled, typically lasting between one and two hours. Hearings are held at Federal Court locations across Canada, and video or teleconference appearances may be available. Your lawyer presents oral argument; witnesses are not called at a judicial review hearing, as the case is decided on the existing record.
Book My Consultation
Talk to Us About Immigration Judicial Review
Our lawyers offer a initial consultation for most matters. Call, email, or book online. Do not sign anything before speaking with us.
Lexaltico LLP
Downtown Toronto
55 University Ave, Suite 1100 Toronto, ON M5J 2H7
North York
2 Sheppard Ave East, Suite 303, Toronto, ON M2N 5Y7
No obligation. We will tell you honestly whether we can help, and what it would cost, before you commit to anything.
We will use these details to reply to your enquiry. Privacy Policy.
A lawyer replies within 24 hours on business days. Urgent? Call +1 416 333 6200, answered 24/7. Submitting this form does not create a solicitor-client relationship.
Representative Outcomes
Cases We Have Handled
Immigration · 2026
Refugee exclusion set aside on judicial review
Mîra v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2026 FC 603Federal Court · Mr. Justice McHaffie · 6 May 2026 · Docket IMM-21730-24 Our client is a Romanian expert accountant. She says she was prosecuted and convicted in her absence on corruption charges after…
Mîra v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2026 FC 603 Federal Court · Mr. Justice McHaffie · 6 May 2026 · Docket IMM-21730-24
Our client is a Romanian expert accountant. She says she was prosecuted and convicted in her absence on corruption charges after refusing to alter her expert reports to suit prosecutors at Romania’s National Anticorruption Directorate. She and her partner claimed refugee protection in Canada in 2018.
How the exclusion arose
The Minister raised exclusion under Article 1F(b) in 2020, then withdrew that intervention in October 2023 after reviewing the evidence. The Refugee Protection Division went on to find our client generally credible and not excluded.
On appeal the Refugee Appeal Division raised exclusion on its own motion, gave notice, and excluded her. The Minister did not intervene. So the finding under review was one the Minister had already abandoned.
What the Court held
The application for judicial review was allowed and the decision set aside for both applicants, on two grounds.
The new evidence. The Division refused fresh evidence of corruption inside the prosecuting authority as irrelevant. The Court found it had mischaracterised the argument and had not engaged with the material at all, which included reporting that linked the prosecutor in our client’s case to indicted officials said to hold influence over prosecutors.
The exclusion finding. The Division reasoned that because Romania is a country where the rule of law prevails, a charge and conviction could be relied on. It cited Arevalo Pineda for that, but not the passages of the same decision requiring an objective assessment of all the claimant’s evidence and satisfaction that the issuing authority itself respects the rule of law. The Court held that reliance on jurisprudence stripped of its qualifying context does not meet the standard, and noted that no assessment of the issuing authority was ever carried out.
On the authority of Qazi, where a claimant alleges the charges are fabricated and has been found credible, the existence of a warrant alone is not enough. The Division had to go further and did not.
Why it was hard
Displacing an Article 1F(b) exclusion is difficult, and considerably harder when the conviction comes from a European Union member state. The presumption that a charge from such a state can be taken at face value is precisely what had to be dislodged, and it was dislodged on the record rather than on assertion.
Outcome
Judicial review allowed. The decision was set aside for both applicants and the appeal remitted to a differently constituted panel. That is the relief sought on a judicial review: the exclusion finding no longer stands and the appeal is heard again before a fresh panel.
“I had the absolute pleasure of working separately with two lawyers from Lexaltico — Pooja Lassi and Matthew Ram — on different matters. The level of professionalism, expertise, and care demonstrated by each of them was consistently exceptional. They do not simply service your needs — they take the time to thoroughly understand your situation and proactively problem-solve.”
SJR
★★★★★
“I had the absolute pleasure of working separately with two lawyers from Lexaltico — Pooja Lassi and Matthew Ram — on different matters. The level of professionalism, expertise, and care demonstrated by each of them was consistently exceptional. They do not simply service your needs — they take the time to thoroughly understand your situation and proactively problem-solve.”
Contacting us does not create a solicitor-client relationship.
Please do not send confidential information until we have confirmed we can act for you.
We aim to reply within one business day. Sending this form does not meet any court deadline
or limitation period.
If you or a child are in immediate danger, call 911.
This form is not an emergency service and is read during business hours.
Assaulted Women’s Helpline 1-866-863-0511,
Talk4Healing 1-855-554-4325, both open around the clock.
We use cookies and similar technologies to understand how this site is
used and to improve it. We handle personal information in accordance with Canadian privacy law,
including PIPEDA. See our Privacy Policy.
Law Society of Ontario RegulatedON & AB
Legal Notices & Disclaimers
No Solicitor-Client Relationship
Use of this website does not establish a solicitor-client relationship between you and Lexaltico LLP. Such a relationship is only formed when Lexaltico LLP has expressly confirmed in writing that it has agreed to act on your behalf. Until that confirmation is provided, no obligation of confidentiality exists.
Not Legal Advice
Information on this website is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Do not act on any information here without first consulting a qualified lawyer licensed in your jurisdiction. Lexaltico LLP disclaims all liability for actions taken or not taken based on this website's contents.
Confidentiality of Enquiries
Do not submit confidential information through this website or by email until a solicitor-client relationship has been confirmed in writing. Information submitted before that point will not be treated as confidential.
Law Society of Ontario Regulation
Lexaltico LLP is regulated by the Law Society of Ontario (LSO) under the Law Society Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. L.8. All lawyers are members in good standing. Alberta matters are handled by lawyers licensed with the Law Society of Alberta (LSA).
Law Society of Alberta
Our Alberta-licensed lawyers are members in good standing of the Law Society of Alberta (LSA).
Immigration Regulatory Body: CICC
Immigration consulting services are provided by Regulated Canadian Immigration Consultants (RCICs) in good standing with the College of Immigration and Citizenship Consultants (CICC) under the College of Immigration and Citizenship Consultants Act, S.C. 2019, c. 29, s. 292.
Estimator & Calculator Tools
The Severance Estimator and Estate Dispute Evaluator are for informational purposes only. Results are estimates and do not account for specific contractual terms, statutory provisions, or judicial discretion. These tools do not create a solicitor-client relationship. Always seek independent legal advice before making any legal decision.
Privacy: PIPEDA and CASL
Your personal information is protected in accordance with the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA), S.C. 2000, c. 5 and Canada's Anti-Spam Legislation (CASL). We do not sell your information. Withdraw consent at any time: hello@lexaltico.com.
Initial Assessment
The complimentary 15-minute initial assessment is a brief introductory conversation. It does not include a review of your documents and does not constitute legal advice. Lexaltico LLP charges a fee for substantive consultations, including civil litigation, criminal defence and immigration matters; the firm may waive that fee at its discretion. Any fee is disclosed in advance and credited in full toward your account if you retain the firm. Documents are reviewed and advice given only at a paid consultation or once the firm has been retained. No solicitor-client relationship arises, and no duty of confidentiality applies, until confirmed in writing.
Referral Fees: LexKonnect
Where we refer a matter to another firm, including through LexKonnect, we comply with Rule 3.6-6.1 of the Law Society of Ontario’s Rules of Professional Conduct. Any referral fee is set out in the Law Society’s standard referral agreement, signed by you before the referral proceeds, and no fee is payable to us unless and until the receiving firm has been paid for its work. You are never obliged to accept a referral and are free to retain any firm you choose. No referral arrangement affects the independent professional judgment of any lawyer at this firm.
Limitation Periods
Failure to commence proceedings within applicable limitation periods may permanently bar your claim. In Ontario, the general limitation period is two (2) years from discovery under the Limitations Act, 2002, S.O. 2002, c. 24, Sched. B. Seek legal advice promptly.
If You Are in Danger
If you or a child are in immediate danger, call 911. This website is not an emergency service. Enquiries sent through this site are read during business hours and a reply may take up to one business day. Do not rely on this site, a form or an email if you need help now. The Assaulted Women’s Helpline (1-866-863-0511) and Talk4Healing (1-855-554-4325) operate around the clock.
Availability and Response Times
We aim to reply to enquiries within one business day. Contacting us does not guarantee a reply within any particular period, does not create any obligation on the firm to act, and does not stop, extend or satisfy any limitation period, filing date or court deadline that applies to your matter.
Our Telephone Line
Our line is answered 24 hours a day, every day of the year. Outside office hours calls are taken by our intake service, who record your details and pass them to the firm. A lawyer responds during the next business day, or sooner if the matter is urgent. Answering the telephone is not the same as giving legal advice: no advice is given on that call and no solicitor-client relationship arises from it. If you or a child are in immediate danger, call 911.
Reviews and Testimonials
Reviews shown on this site are written by third parties and published on platforms we do not control. Each describes one person’s experience of one matter. They are not a promise, a prediction or a guarantee about any other matter, and they should not be read as a statement about the quality of legal services generally. Every case turns on its own facts.
Links to Other Websites
This site links to regulators, courts, government sources, professional associations and social platforms. Those sites are operated by others. We do not control them, we are not responsible for their content or their accuracy, and a link is not an endorsement. Their privacy practices are their own, not ours.
Where Your Enquiry Information Goes
Information submitted through a form on this site is transmitted using third-party services in order to reach us by email, and may be processed or stored outside Canada, where it can be subject to the laws of that jurisdiction. By submitting a form you consent to that transfer. If you would rather not, telephone us on +1 416 333 6200 instead. We do not sell your information.
Accessibility
We aim to meet the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act and WCAG 2.1 Level AA. If any part of this site prevents you from reaching us, telephone +1 416 333 6200 or email hello@lexaltico.com and we will provide the information in another format. Tell us what would work for you and we will arrange it at no charge.
Lawyers, Paralegals and Consultants
Not everyone at the firm is a lawyer. Licensed paralegals in Ontario may act only within the scope permitted by the Law Society of Ontario, which does not include most family, estate or criminal matters. Immigration consulting may be provided by Regulated Canadian Immigration Consultants, who are not lawyers. Each page and each biography states which applies. Ask us at the outset who will handle your matter and under which licence.
Languages
We serve clients in a number of languages. Every page of this site is written and published in English. Where a document, a summary or a conversation is provided in another language, the English version governs in the event of any difference. If you need an interpreter, tell us when you book and we will arrange one.
Lexaltico LLP
Legal Notices
How Lexaltico LLP handles personal information, under PIPEDA and Ontario law.
What we collect
What you give us
When you use a form on this site, email us or telephone us, we collect what you choose to send:
your name, email address, telephone number and a description of the situation. Nothing on this
site requires you to give more than that.
What is collected automatically
We collect non identifying technical information when you browse: IP address, browser type, pages
viewed and time spent. It is used to understand how the site is used and to improve it. It is not
used to identify you.
What we do not collect here
We do not collect sensitive personal information through this website. Detailed personal and legal
information is collected only after a solicitor client relationship exists, through the channels
set up for that purpose.
How we use it
Purpose
What you send is used to reply to you, to run a conflict check, to assess whether the firm can
assist, and, if a retainer follows, to carry out the work.
Marketing
We do not use your personal information for marketing without your express consent, and we
do not sell, rent or trade it. If you consent to receive anything from us, every message
carries a way to stop, as required by Canada’s Anti Spam Legislation.
Sharing and disclosure
Privilege
Information given to us in the course of a legal matter is protected by solicitor client
privilege. We do not disclose privileged information without your consent, except where the law or
a court order requires it.
Service providers
Non privileged contact information may be shared with the providers who help us run the firm and
this website, and with people engaged on your matter such as translators, agents and court
reporters. All of them are under confidentiality obligations.
Processing outside Canada
Information submitted through a form travels through third party services in order to reach us by
email, and may be processed or stored outside Canada, where it can be subject to
the laws of that place. Submitting a form is your consent to that transfer. If you would rather
not, telephone us instead.
Cookies and measurement
What is set, and when
This site uses cookies to understand how it is used. Advertising cookies are set only if you press
Accept. If you press Decline, measurement is switched off for you entirely, nothing further
is sent, and anything already stored on your device is cleared. The site works either
way.
You can change your answer at any time by clearing this site’s cookies in your browser, which
brings the question back.
Your rights, and how long we keep things
Your rights under PIPEDA
Under the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act,
S.C. 2000, c. 5 you may ask what personal information we hold about you, ask us to correct
anything inaccurate, and withdraw consent to our use of it, subject to legal and contractual
limits. We reply within thirty days or explain why we need longer.
Retention
Client files are kept for the period the law and the Law Society require, ordinarily
seven years after a matter closes, which reflects limitation periods and the
possibility of later proceedings. After that they are securely destroyed or anonymised. You may
ask for earlier deletion, subject to those obligations.
Enquiries that do not become files
If you contact us and no retainer follows, what you sent is retained only as long as our conflict
records require, then destroyed.
If you are not satisfied with our answer you may complain to the Office of the Privacy
Commissioner of Canada.
Short, and written to be read rather than scrolled past.
The four things that matter most
Nothing on this site is legal advice, however specific it looks.
Using the site or sending a form does not make us your lawyers.
Do not send confidential information before a retainer is signed.
Past results depend on their own facts and do not predict yours.
What this site is
Information, not advice
This site publishes several hundred pages about Ontario law. They are written carefully, they cite
statutes and cases by name, and they are reviewed. None of that makes them advice about your
matter. Law is applied to facts, and we do not know yours.
The difference is practical rather than technical. A page explaining that spousal support is
usually indefinite after a twenty year marriage is accurate as a general statement and may be
wrong about you, because of a domestic contract you signed, a period of separation you have
forgotten, or an income that is not what a tax return says it is.
Law also changes. Pages carry a review date where one is relevant. A page reviewed last year may
not reflect an amendment made since, and a page about a subject currently before an appellate
court may be overtaken between your reading it and your acting on it.
When we become your lawyers
Three things must happen first
A conflict check must be completed. We act for a great many people and
businesses, and we cannot act against a current client or use what we learned from a former one.
That check happens before anything else and occasionally means we have to decline.
We must confirm in writing that we are prepared to act. Not every matter is one we
can take, and saying so early is better than taking a file we cannot properly serve.
A retainer agreement must be signed. It sets out what we are doing, what we are
not doing, who is responsible for what, and how fees work. Until it is signed no relationship
exists, whatever has been discussed.
Confidentiality before a retainer
Why you should not send us documents yet
Information sent through a form, or by email, before a retainer is signed is not covered by
solicitor client privilege. That is not a policy we chose. It follows from there being no
solicitor client relationship for the privilege to attach to.
It can also create a problem for you. If you send us detailed information about a dispute and we
are later approached by the other side, what you sent may affect whether we can act for either of
you.
So tell us the shape of the problem and leave out the detail: the area of law, roughly when it
arose, and whether anything is urgent. That is enough for us to say whether we can help. The
documents come after the retainer.
Results, testimonials and reviews
What they do and do not tell you
Case results described anywhere on this site are real and are described accurately, and they are
specific to their own facts. A settlement at three times the original offer happened because of
that employer, that contract and that person’s history. It says nothing about what your
matter is worth.
Client reviews are the views of the people who wrote them. We do not offer anything in return for
a review, we do not write them, and we do not ask only the clients we expect to be positive.
Calculators on this site produce estimates from the figures you enter. They apply published
formulas and they cannot know about the facts that most often change the answer.
Copyright, links and governing law
Copyright
The content of this site belongs to Lexaltico LLP or its licensors. You are welcome to read it,
print it and quote it with attribution. You may not republish it as your own.
Links
We link to statutes, regulations, court decisions and government pages because a reader should be
able to check us. We do not control those sites and are not responsible for them, and a link is
not an endorsement.
Limitation of liability
To the fullest extent the law permits, Lexaltico LLP is not liable for any loss arising from your
use of, or reliance on, anything published on this website.
Governing law
These terms are governed by the law of Ontario and the federal law of Canada that applies in
Ontario. Lawyers and licensed professionals at the firm are regulated by the Law Society of
Ontario, and marketing on this site is intended to comply with the
Rules of Professional Conduct.
Every limit on what this website tells you, and every thing it does not do, in one
place rather than in small print at the bottom of each page.
Before you rely on anything here
Four limits, and they matter in this order.
Not legal advice
Everything published on this website is general information. It is not legal
advice, it does not take account of the facts of any particular situation, and reading it does not
create a solicitor client relationship. Do not act, or decide not to act, on anything here without
speaking to a lawyer licensed in your jurisdiction about your own circumstances.
Jurisdiction
These pages describe the law of Ontario, and of Alberta only
where a page says so expressly. They do not describe the law of any other province, territory or
country. Law that looks similar across jurisdictions frequently is not.
Currency of the law
Each page states the law as at the review date shown on it. Legislation is amended and case law
develops. A page accurate when written may no longer be.
Generality
These pages describe how a rule usually works. That is not the same as how it applies to your
facts. The exceptions are where most real matters live, and a page written for a general reader
cannot tell you whether you are inside a rule or inside its exception.
If you contact us
If you are in danger
If you or a child are in immediate danger, call 911.
This website is not an emergency service. Enquiries sent through a form here are read during
business hours and a reply may take up to one business day.
Using this website, submitting a form, sending an email or speaking to us on the telephone does
not make us your lawyers. That relationship arises only when the firm has
confirmed in writing that it has agreed to act, a conflict search has been completed, and a
retainer has been signed.
Confidentiality of enquiries
Do not send confidential or sensitive information through this website or by email until we have
confirmed in writing that we can act for you. Information sent before that point is
not treated as confidential and may prevent us from acting for you, or for
someone else, in a connected matter.
Response times
We aim to reply within one business day. Contacting us does not guarantee a reply within any
particular period, does not oblige the firm to act, and does not stop, extend or satisfy
any limitation period, filing date or court deadline.
Our telephone line
Our line is answered 24 hours a day, every day of the year. Outside office hours calls are taken
by our intake service, who record your details and pass them to the firm. A lawyer responds during
the next business day, or sooner if the matter is urgent. Answering the telephone is not the same
as giving legal advice, and no relationship arises from that call.
Who we are and how we are regulated
Law Society of Ontario
Lexaltico LLP is regulated by the Law Society of Ontario under the
Law Society Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. L.8. All lawyers practising in
Ontario through the firm are members in good standing.
Law Society of Alberta
Alberta matters are handled by lawyers licensed with, and in good standing with, the
Law Society of Alberta. A lawyer licensed in Ontario is not thereby licensed in
Alberta, and the reverse is also true.
Immigration regulation
Immigration consulting is provided by Regulated Canadian Immigration Consultants
in good standing with the College of Immigration and Citizenship Consultants under the
College of Immigration and Citizenship Consultants Act, S.C. 2019, c. 29,
s. 292.
Lawyers, paralegals and consultants
Not everyone at the firm is a lawyer.
Licensed paralegals in Ontario may act only within the scope the Law Society
permits, which does not include most family, estate or criminal matters.
Immigration consultants are regulated by the College, not by a law society,
and are not lawyers.
Law clerks and managers support files but do not give legal advice.
Each page and biography states which applies. Ask at the outset who will handle your matter and
under which licence.
Languages
We serve clients in thirteen languages. Every page of this website is written and published in
English. Where anything is provided in another language, the English
version governs in the event of a difference. If you need an interpreter, tell us when
you book and we will arrange one.
Fees
The initial assessment
The complimentary 15 minute initial assessment is a brief introductory
conversation. It does not include a review of your documents and does not constitute
legal advice.
The firm charges a fee for substantive consultations, including in civil litigation,
criminal defence and immigration matters. The firm may waive that fee at its discretion.
Any fee is disclosed in advance and credited in full toward your account if you retain the
firm.
Referral fees
Where we refer a matter to another firm, including through LexKonnect, we comply with Rule 3.6-6.1 of the Law Society of Ontario’s Rules of Professional Conduct. Any referral fee is set out in the Law Society’s standard referral agreement, signed by you before the referral proceeds, and no fee is payable to us unless and until the receiving firm has been paid for its work. You are never obliged to accept a referral and are free to retain any firm you choose. No referral arrangement affects the independent professional judgment of any lawyer at this firm.
What is published on this site
Calculators and estimators
They produce estimates from what you type and cannot know the rest. They do not
account for the terms of your contract, statutory exceptions, or the discretion a court will
apply. Do not make a decision on a number produced by a calculator.
Past results
Any outcome described happened on its own facts, before its own decision maker,
under the law as it stood at the time. Past results do not predict or guarantee the result of any
other case.
Reviews and testimonials
Reviews shown here are written by third parties and published on platforms we do not control. Each
describes one person’s experience of one matter. They are not a promise, a
prediction or a guarantee about any other matter.
Links to other websites
This site links to regulators, courts, government sources, professional associations and social
platforms, all operated by others. We do not control them, we are not responsible for
their content or accuracy, and a link is not an endorsement.
Other notices
Limitation periods
Failure to start a proceeding within the applicable limitation period may permanently bar
your claim. In Ontario the general period is two years from discovery
under the Limitations Act, 2002, S.O. 2002, c. 24, Sched. B.
Shorter periods apply to many claims. Seek advice promptly. Nothing on this website extends a
limitation period.
Accessibility
We aim to meet the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act
and WCAG 2.1 Level AA. If any part of this site prevents you from reaching us, telephone
+1 416 333 6200 or write to
hello@lexaltico.com and we will provide the information
in another format, at no charge.
