<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Publications &#8211; Rogers Partners LLP</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.rogerspartners.com/category/publications/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.rogerspartners.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Mar 2026 18:51:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=5.4.19</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Can a Comma Decide Coverage?</title>
		<link>https://www.rogerspartners.com/can-a-comma-decide-coverage/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=can-a-comma-decide-coverage</link>
					<comments>https://www.rogerspartners.com/can-a-comma-decide-coverage/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[rpllpadmin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Mar 2026 12:58:25 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Publications]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.rogerspartners.com/?p=7690</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>By Jaaron Pullenayegem Sometimes the difference between coverage and no coverage comes down to a single comma. Insurance policies often contain listed items with a trailing modifier at the end. However, disputes can arise in deciding whether the modifier at the end of a list applies to all of the listed items, or only the [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.rogerspartners.com/can-a-comma-decide-coverage/">Can a Comma Decide Coverage?</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.rogerspartners.com">Rogers Partners LLP</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.rogerspartners.com/can-a-comma-decide-coverage/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Not So Sweet Settlement: Court Upholds Consent Judgment</title>
		<link>https://www.rogerspartners.com/a-not-so-sweet-settlement-court-upholds-consent-judgment/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=a-not-so-sweet-settlement-court-upholds-consent-judgment</link>
					<comments>https://www.rogerspartners.com/a-not-so-sweet-settlement-court-upholds-consent-judgment/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[rpllpadmin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2025 11:07:01 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Publications]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.rogerspartners.com/?p=7503</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>By Susan McKelvey In the recent Ontario Superior Court of Justice decision of Abdullah v. Mursal, 2025 ONSC 4647, the court addressed the complex legal implications of insurance settlements made without the insured’s direct consent. Background Information In September 2017, Fathi Mursal was operating a motor vehicle in Scarborough, Ontario. As he was making a [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.rogerspartners.com/a-not-so-sweet-settlement-court-upholds-consent-judgment/">A Not So Sweet Settlement: Court Upholds Consent Judgment</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.rogerspartners.com">Rogers Partners LLP</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.rogerspartners.com/a-not-so-sweet-settlement-court-upholds-consent-judgment/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Artificial Intelligence: Efficiency v. Dangers of Cutting Corners</title>
		<link>https://www.rogerspartners.com/artificial-intelligence-efficiency-v-dangers-of-cutting-corners/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=artificial-intelligence-efficiency-v-dangers-of-cutting-corners</link>
					<comments>https://www.rogerspartners.com/artificial-intelligence-efficiency-v-dangers-of-cutting-corners/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[rpllpadmin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jul 2025 14:33:07 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Publications]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.rogerspartners.com/?p=7450</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>By Mihail Salariu It’s hard to disagree that technological improvements have made positive contributions to the legal profession. Notwithstanding the lists of drawbacks and trade-offs readily argued by those who enjoyed spending two nights at a Best Western after a short flight to the Sault, virtual hearings and examinations, cloud storage and drop boxes, among [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.rogerspartners.com/artificial-intelligence-efficiency-v-dangers-of-cutting-corners/">Artificial Intelligence: Efficiency v. Dangers of Cutting Corners</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.rogerspartners.com">Rogers Partners LLP</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.rogerspartners.com/artificial-intelligence-efficiency-v-dangers-of-cutting-corners/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Summary Judgment Motions: Don’t Appeal Before the Motion is Complete</title>
		<link>https://www.rogerspartners.com/summary-judgment-motions-dont-appeal-before-the-motion-is-complete/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=summary-judgment-motions-dont-appeal-before-the-motion-is-complete</link>
					<comments>https://www.rogerspartners.com/summary-judgment-motions-dont-appeal-before-the-motion-is-complete/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[rpllpadmin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Jun 2024 16:43:42 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Publications]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.rogerspartners.com/?p=7018</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>By Katrina Taibi Overview: In Athanassiades v. Rogers Communications Canada Inc.,[1] the Court of Appeal concluded that absent truly exceptional circumstances, a summary judgment motion should not be appealed until it is complete. Background Facts: The plaintiff, Andrew Athanassiades, brought an action against the defendant, Rogers Communication Canada Inc. (“Rogers”), alleging failure to provide him [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.rogerspartners.com/summary-judgment-motions-dont-appeal-before-the-motion-is-complete/">Summary Judgment Motions: Don’t Appeal Before the Motion is Complete</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.rogerspartners.com">Rogers Partners LLP</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.rogerspartners.com/summary-judgment-motions-dont-appeal-before-the-motion-is-complete/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Discharging a Jury: How Much Explanation is Required from a Trial Judge?</title>
		<link>https://www.rogerspartners.com/discharging-a-jury-how-much-explanation-is-required-from-a-trial-judge/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=discharging-a-jury-how-much-explanation-is-required-from-a-trial-judge</link>
					<comments>https://www.rogerspartners.com/discharging-a-jury-how-much-explanation-is-required-from-a-trial-judge/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[rpllpadmin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Mar 2024 18:30:27 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Publications]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.rogerspartners.com/?p=6903</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>By Katrina Taibi Overview: In Penate v. Martoglio[1] the Court of Appeal concluded that when a trial judge discharges a jury, they must explain their reasons for doing so beyond conclusory remarks. Background Facts: The plaintiff, Norman Penate, was born on July 15, 1996 at St. Michael’s Hospital in Toronto.&#160; Doctors decided to induce labour [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.rogerspartners.com/discharging-a-jury-how-much-explanation-is-required-from-a-trial-judge/">Discharging a Jury: How Much Explanation is Required from a Trial Judge?</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.rogerspartners.com">Rogers Partners LLP</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.rogerspartners.com/discharging-a-jury-how-much-explanation-is-required-from-a-trial-judge/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Driver’s Deception Ends in Denied Coverage</title>
		<link>https://www.rogerspartners.com/drivers-deception-ends-in-denied-coverage/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=drivers-deception-ends-in-denied-coverage</link>
					<comments>https://www.rogerspartners.com/drivers-deception-ends-in-denied-coverage/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[rpllpadmin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Feb 2024 19:23:10 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Publications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Insurance Coverage]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.rogerspartners.com/?p=6899</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>By Kathryn Orydzuk The decision in&#160;Wong v. Aviva Insurance Company of Canada, 2024 ONSC 1111, addresses an unusual scenario involving a denial of insurance coverage after the insureds lied about who was driving the defendant vehicle. Wong was the driver of a vehicle involved in an accident in 2019 with another driver, Robertson. Believing that [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.rogerspartners.com/drivers-deception-ends-in-denied-coverage/">Driver’s Deception Ends in Denied Coverage</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.rogerspartners.com">Rogers Partners LLP</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.rogerspartners.com/drivers-deception-ends-in-denied-coverage/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>An Expanded Approach to Vicarious Liability under the Highway Traffic Act</title>
		<link>https://www.rogerspartners.com/an-expanded-approach-to-vicarious-liability-under-the-highway-traffic-act/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=an-expanded-approach-to-vicarious-liability-under-the-highway-traffic-act</link>
					<comments>https://www.rogerspartners.com/an-expanded-approach-to-vicarious-liability-under-the-highway-traffic-act/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[rpllpadmin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Jan 2024 18:59:11 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Publications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Motor Vehicle Accidents]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.rogerspartners.com/?p=6879</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>By Erin Crochetière The Court of Appeal for Ontario recently expanded the applicability of the vicarious liability provision outlined in s. 192(2) of the Highway Traffic Act in Desrochers v. McGinnis, 2024 ONCA 63. The case involved an accident whereby the plaintiff, Megan, was operating an ATV on a dirt road when she lost control [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.rogerspartners.com/an-expanded-approach-to-vicarious-liability-under-the-highway-traffic-act/">An Expanded Approach to Vicarious Liability under the Highway Traffic Act</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.rogerspartners.com">Rogers Partners LLP</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.rogerspartners.com/an-expanded-approach-to-vicarious-liability-under-the-highway-traffic-act/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>When the Private Insurance Exception Does Not Apply</title>
		<link>https://www.rogerspartners.com/when-the-private-insurance-exception-does-not-apply/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=when-the-private-insurance-exception-does-not-apply</link>
					<comments>https://www.rogerspartners.com/when-the-private-insurance-exception-does-not-apply/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[rpllpadmin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2023 15:33:21 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Publications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Automobile Claims]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.rogerspartners.com/?p=6833</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>By Kathryn Orydzuk The Ontario Superior Court of Justice recently interpreted and applied the provisions of the Insurance Act intended to address double recovery and the private insurance exception in McCurdy, et al. v Maille, et. al., 2023 ONSC 6857. In the reasons on this post-trial motion regarding collateral benefits, Justice Nicholson ruled that the [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.rogerspartners.com/when-the-private-insurance-exception-does-not-apply/">When the Private Insurance Exception Does Not Apply</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.rogerspartners.com">Rogers Partners LLP</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.rogerspartners.com/when-the-private-insurance-exception-does-not-apply/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Rogers Partners Summer 2023 Newsletter</title>
		<link>https://www.rogerspartners.com/rogers-partners-summer-2023-newsletter/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=rogers-partners-summer-2023-newsletter</link>
					<comments>https://www.rogerspartners.com/rogers-partners-summer-2023-newsletter/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[rpllpadmin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Sep 2023 14:30:57 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Publications]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.rogerspartners.com/?p=6694</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>We&#8217;re pleased to present our Summer 2023 Newsletter. We hope you find the following topics to be of interest: Landlord Not Liable When Tenant’s Dog Attacks When is a Municipality Liable in a Motor Vehicle Accident? Weighing the Public Interest on Anti-SLAPP Motions Is a Passenger Injured in a Stolen Vehicle Excluded from Coverage? LAT [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.rogerspartners.com/rogers-partners-summer-2023-newsletter/">Rogers Partners Summer 2023 Newsletter</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.rogerspartners.com">Rogers Partners LLP</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.rogerspartners.com/rogers-partners-summer-2023-newsletter/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Call for Action on Delay in the Civil Justice System</title>
		<link>https://www.rogerspartners.com/a-call-for-action-on-delay-in-the-civil-justice-system/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=a-call-for-action-on-delay-in-the-civil-justice-system</link>
					<comments>https://www.rogerspartners.com/a-call-for-action-on-delay-in-the-civil-justice-system/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[rpllpadmin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Jul 2023 14:57:27 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Publications]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.rogerspartners.com/?p=6579</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Stephen Ross is a member of The Advocates’ Society’s Civil Justice Delay Task Force.  As part of the Task Force, Mr. Ross, with the assistance of Katrina Taibi, contributed to an article written by The Advocates’ Society on the issue of civil justice delays, titled “A Call for Action on Delay in the Civil Justice [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.rogerspartners.com/a-call-for-action-on-delay-in-the-civil-justice-system/">A Call for Action on Delay in the Civil Justice System</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.rogerspartners.com">Rogers Partners LLP</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.rogerspartners.com/a-call-for-action-on-delay-in-the-civil-justice-system/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
