close
  1. Skip to navigation
  2. Skip to content
  3. Skip to sidebar


Legal Guide


A business may be carried on in Canada in various forms. Most commonly, a business being carried on in Canada by a foreign corporation would be conducted using a corporate vehicle, either through a Canadian incorporated subsidiary or through a branch operation of the foreign corporation. Depending on the nature and scope of the activity, the degree of limited liability required, certain tax and other considerations, the business activity could also be conducted through a sole proprietorship (for an individual), a partnership or a joint venture. It is also possible, in some cases, to supply goods and services to Canadians through various contractual arrangements, such as distributorship agreements, without actually setting up a business in Canada. The legal implications of the respective vehicles available for carrying on business in Canada are summarized below.

Additional posts from the blog

Nov

12

Canada’s Anti-Spam Law – New Guidance on Offering Apps, Software

by Margot Patterson

CASL also prohibits installing a “computer program” – including an app, widget, software, or other executable data – on a computer system (e.g. computer, device) unless the program is installed with consent and complies with disclosure requirements. The provisions in CASL related to the installation of computer programs will come into force on January 15, 2015.

May

02

Environment Canada issues Hydrofluorocarbon reporting requirement

by Nalin Sahni

On April 7, 2014, the Minister of the Environment issued a Notice with respect to hydrofluorocarbons (the “Notice”), pursuant to the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999. The Notice imposes reporting requirements on those who imported, exported, or manufactured certain hydrofluorocarbons (“HFCs”) from 2008 and 2012. A non-exhaustive list of HFCs subject to these reporting requirements can be found in Schedule 1 of the Notice.

Apr

17

“Oh, what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive.”

by Andy Pushalik

In an interesting decision, the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario has ruled that an employer is not liable for discriminatory and harassing texts sent by a rogue employee to another of its workers.



Privacy Policy | Terms of Use
Dentons
FMC Law

© 2017 Dentons