<?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>Rogers Partners LLP</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.rogerspartners.com/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.rogerspartners.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 27 Aug 2026 03:07:26 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=5.4.21</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Should I Stay an Arbitration or Should I Go</title>
		<link>https://www.rogerspartners.com/should-i-stay-an-arbitration-or-should-i-go/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=should-i-stay-an-arbitration-or-should-i-go</link>
					<comments>https://www.rogerspartners.com/should-i-stay-an-arbitration-or-should-i-go/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[rpllpadmin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Aug 2026 23:05:55 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Updates]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Civil Procedure]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.rogerspartners.com/?p=7823</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>By Cameron Allan In a recent decision, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice provides guidance on a novel remedy under Section 13 (7) of the Arbitration Act, 1991, and determines the appropriate test for when a stay of an arbitration should be granted. Overview In&#160;Atkinsréalis Construction (Pacific) Inc. v. GIP Construction Ontario East Ltd., 2026 [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.rogerspartners.com/should-i-stay-an-arbitration-or-should-i-go/">Should I Stay an Arbitration or Should I Go</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.rogerspartners.com">Rogers Partners LLP</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.rogerspartners.com/should-i-stay-an-arbitration-or-should-i-go/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Interests of Justice Prevail: Rule 53.08 and Admitting Evidence with Leave</title>
		<link>https://www.rogerspartners.com/the-interests-of-justice-prevail-rule-53-08-admitting-evidence-with-leave/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-interests-of-justice-prevail-rule-53-08-admitting-evidence-with-leave</link>
					<comments>https://www.rogerspartners.com/the-interests-of-justice-prevail-rule-53-08-admitting-evidence-with-leave/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[rpllpadmin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Aug 2026 15:38:41 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Publications]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.rogerspartners.com/?p=7818</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>By Angie Ortiz-Romero In a medical malpractice action, Donna Pelrine, by her Estate Trustee James Pelrine et al. v. Chung et al., 2026 ONSC 4362 (CanLII), Dr. Pin Chung requested leave under Rule 53.08 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, to admit into evidence three late served expert reports, which included a standard of care [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.rogerspartners.com/the-interests-of-justice-prevail-rule-53-08-admitting-evidence-with-leave/">The Interests of Justice Prevail: Rule 53.08 and Admitting Evidence with Leave</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.rogerspartners.com">Rogers Partners LLP</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.rogerspartners.com/the-interests-of-justice-prevail-rule-53-08-admitting-evidence-with-leave/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Fridays with Rogers Partners</title>
		<link>https://www.rogerspartners.com/fridays-with-rogers-partners-147/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=fridays-with-rogers-partners-147</link>
					<comments>https://www.rogerspartners.com/fridays-with-rogers-partners-147/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[rpllpadmin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Aug 2026 15:26:03 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Updates]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Insurance Coverage]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.rogerspartners.com/?p=7815</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>At our weekly meeting, Kate Ferguson discussed the recent decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal in West York Sales and Leasing Inc. v. Dominion of Canada General Insurance Company (Travelers Canada),  2026 ONCA 553. Facts and Procedural history This is an appeal arising from an application by West York Sales and Leasing Inc. (“West [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.rogerspartners.com/fridays-with-rogers-partners-147/">Fridays with Rogers Partners</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.rogerspartners.com">Rogers Partners LLP</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.rogerspartners.com/fridays-with-rogers-partners-147/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Control Alt Liability: The SCC Weighs in on Destroyed Evidence</title>
		<link>https://www.rogerspartners.com/control-alt-liability-the-scc-weighs-in-on-destroyed-evidence/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=control-alt-liability-the-scc-weighs-in-on-destroyed-evidence</link>
					<comments>https://www.rogerspartners.com/control-alt-liability-the-scc-weighs-in-on-destroyed-evidence/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[rpllpadmin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Aug 2026 14:30:54 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Updates]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spoliation]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.rogerspartners.com/?p=7813</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>By Aliyyah Khan The Supreme Court of Canada recently weighed in on a significant case involving SS&#38;C Technologies Canada Corporation (SS&#38;C) and the Bank of New York Mellon Corporation (BNY), delivering a unanimous decision that has important implications for how digital evidence is handled in litigation. The case, SS&#38;C Technologies Canada Corp. v. Bank of [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.rogerspartners.com/control-alt-liability-the-scc-weighs-in-on-destroyed-evidence/">Control Alt Liability: The SCC Weighs in on Destroyed Evidence</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.rogerspartners.com">Rogers Partners LLP</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.rogerspartners.com/control-alt-liability-the-scc-weighs-in-on-destroyed-evidence/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Fridays with Rogers Partners</title>
		<link>https://www.rogerspartners.com/fridays-with-rogers-partners-146/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=fridays-with-rogers-partners-146</link>
					<comments>https://www.rogerspartners.com/fridays-with-rogers-partners-146/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[rpllpadmin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Aug 2026 22:35:00 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Friday Forum]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Limitation Periods]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.rogerspartners.com/?p=7810</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>At our weekly meeting,&#160;Amanda Chiu&#160;discussed the recent decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal in Lloyd v. Baker, 2026 ONCA 434. The decision provides important guidance on the discoverability of claims under the Limitations Act, 2002&#160;in motor vehicle personal injury actions. Facts and Procedural History The respondent, Ms. Lloyd, sustained a concussion in a motor [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.rogerspartners.com/fridays-with-rogers-partners-146/">Fridays with Rogers Partners</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.rogerspartners.com">Rogers Partners LLP</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.rogerspartners.com/fridays-with-rogers-partners-146/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Fridays with Rogers Partners</title>
		<link>https://www.rogerspartners.com/fridays-with-rogers-partners-145/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=fridays-with-rogers-partners-145</link>
					<comments>https://www.rogerspartners.com/fridays-with-rogers-partners-145/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[rpllpadmin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Jul 2026 12:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Friday Forum]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Insurance Coverage]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.rogerspartners.com/?p=7808</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>At our weekly meeting, Nathan Ching discussed the recent decision of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice in Carr Law P.C. et al. v. Certas Home and Auto Ins. Co., 2026 ONSC 2203. The case is among the first of its kind to discuss business interruption coverage resulting from an organized crime attack on property [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.rogerspartners.com/fridays-with-rogers-partners-145/">Fridays with Rogers Partners</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.rogerspartners.com">Rogers Partners LLP</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.rogerspartners.com/fridays-with-rogers-partners-145/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Welcoming Our 2026–2027 Articling Students</title>
		<link>https://www.rogerspartners.com/welcoming-our-2026-2027-articling-students/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=welcoming-our-2026-2027-articling-students</link>
					<comments>https://www.rogerspartners.com/welcoming-our-2026-2027-articling-students/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[rpllpadmin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Jul 2026 03:09:48 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Firm News]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.rogerspartners.com/?p=7800</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>We are excited to introduce our new articling students: Nathan Ching, Amanda Chiu, Kate Ferguson, and Jack Haddad. Over the coming year, Nathan, Amanda, Kate, and Jack will work alongside our lawyers on a broad range of insurance defence and civil litigation matters, gaining practical experience while contributing to the work of our firm and [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.rogerspartners.com/welcoming-our-2026-2027-articling-students/">Welcoming Our 2026–2027 Articling Students</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.rogerspartners.com">Rogers Partners LLP</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.rogerspartners.com/welcoming-our-2026-2027-articling-students/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Rogers Partners Welcomes Angie Ortiz-Romero and Namrita Taggar</title>
		<link>https://www.rogerspartners.com/rogers-partners-welcomes-angie-ortiz-romero-and-namrita-taggar/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=rogers-partners-welcomes-angie-ortiz-romero-and-namrita-taggar</link>
					<comments>https://www.rogerspartners.com/rogers-partners-welcomes-angie-ortiz-romero-and-namrita-taggar/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[rpllpadmin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Jul 2026 14:35:53 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Firm News]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.rogerspartners.com/?p=7793</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>We are pleased to announce that Angie Ortiz-Romero and Namrita Taggar have joined Rogers Partners LLP as our newest associates. Angie and Namrita each bring excellent academic achievements, strong advocacy experience, and a passion for litigation. We are excited to have them on our team and look forward to supporting them as they build their [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.rogerspartners.com/rogers-partners-welcomes-angie-ortiz-romero-and-namrita-taggar/">Rogers Partners Welcomes Angie Ortiz-Romero and Namrita Taggar</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-welcomes-angie-ortiz-romero-and-namrita-taggar/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Field of “Beams”: Court Denies Claim of Plaintiff Blinded By the Light During Rec-League Softball Game</title>
		<link>https://www.rogerspartners.com/field-of-beams-court-denies-claim-of-plaintiff-blinded-by-the-light-during-rec-league-softball-game/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=field-of-beams-court-denies-claim-of-plaintiff-blinded-by-the-light-during-rec-league-softball-game</link>
					<comments>https://www.rogerspartners.com/field-of-beams-court-denies-claim-of-plaintiff-blinded-by-the-light-during-rec-league-softball-game/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[rpllpadmin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 25 Jul 2026 15:58:10 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Updates]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Occupiers' Liability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Waivers]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.rogerspartners.com/?p=7791</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>By Michael Kryworuk In May 2026, Justice Mark L. Edwards released his decision in Kolsen v. The Corporation of the Town of New Tecumseth et al, 2026 ONSC 2729. This decision concerned the trial of a matter whereby the plaintiff was struck in the eye by a baseball while playing in an adult recreational league. [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.rogerspartners.com/field-of-beams-court-denies-claim-of-plaintiff-blinded-by-the-light-during-rec-league-softball-game/">Field of “Beams”: Court Denies Claim of Plaintiff Blinded By the Light During Rec-League Softball Game</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.rogerspartners.com">Rogers Partners LLP</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.rogerspartners.com/field-of-beams-court-denies-claim-of-plaintiff-blinded-by-the-light-during-rec-league-softball-game/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bifurcation: Another Tool in the Toolbelt</title>
		<link>https://www.rogerspartners.com/bifurcation-another-tool-in-the-toolbelt/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=bifurcation-another-tool-in-the-toolbelt</link>
					<comments>https://www.rogerspartners.com/bifurcation-another-tool-in-the-toolbelt/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[rpllpadmin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2026 21:49:22 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Updates]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Civil Procedure]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.rogerspartners.com/?p=7779</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>By Zoe Panday Often in our practice, we are seeking to manage complex proceedings where multiple claims are issued relating to the same loss. Actions can move at different paces and face different procedural hurdles. Both counsel and the court are tasked with addressing these issues with a view to preventing inconsistent results and reducing [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.rogerspartners.com/bifurcation-another-tool-in-the-toolbelt/">Bifurcation: Another Tool in the Toolbelt</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.rogerspartners.com">Rogers Partners LLP</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.rogerspartners.com/bifurcation-another-tool-in-the-toolbelt/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
