Thrilla in Manila

Thrilla in Manila 

It may not be “Smokin’ Joe” v. The Louisville Lip”. But hopefully MacIntosh v. Waitzer may supply at least some dry-as-dust securities lawyers with a moment or two's entertainment. 

In his second attack on my defense of Heather Zordel’s appointment as Chair of the OSC Board of Directors, Ed Waitzer not only claims that I repeatedly miss the mark, but that I do so in a way that would embarrass any reasonably savvy law student. He even says that I was “disingenuous”. Hmmm.

In fact, it is Ed who, like Sancho Panza, continues to tilt at windmills. In his initial critique, Ed stated “As the Globe article noted, following a negative recommendation of five of the eight part-time commissioners, in early 2021 Heather Zordel was not reappointed by the Ontario government as a part-time commissioner”.  In his second critique, Ed continues to deny that this tells the reader that Ms. Zordel was deliberately not re-appointed (as opposed to taking herself out of the running because of her busy legal practice). He says “I simply observed that her appointment was not renewed (and, in very short order, she re-applied). Words matter.”

OSC appointment fuss is a tempest in a teapot

The following first appeared in the National Post, Jul 25, 2022  

Ed Waitzer’s recent op-ed (“The issue at the OSC is integrity, not debate,” July 14, 2022) expresses surprise and disappointment in my recent op-ed (“Conflict at the OSC: Why the regulator needs to make room for dissent,” July 7, 2022). In that op-ed, I argued that lawyer Heather Zordel’s appointment as non-executive chair of the OSC in March of this year should be met with open arms, as it introduces new points of view into what seems to be a rather intellectually closed shop. I don’t suppose it will come as a shock to Ed Waitzer or anyone else that I am surprised and disappointed at his rebuttal.

To begin with, it contains a number of inaccuracies. It states that Ms. Zordel was denied reappointment to her earlier position (2019-2021) as part-time commissioner. In fact, given her busy legal practice, she took herself out of the running. This puts a rather different complexion on the matter.

Conflict at the OSC — Why the regulator needs to make room for dissent

 The following originally appeared in the National Post, July 7, 2022

Much heat has been generated lately about what’s going on at the Ontario Securities Commission, but, tragically, little light. 

The government’s appointment of Heather Zordel as non-executive chair of the OSC in March has raised some razor-sharp hackles. The Globe and Mail published a story on June 25 that relayed many pious and unflattering incantations related to Zordel’s allegedly questionable behaviour in her previous incarnation as a part-time commissioner at the OSC. Two former part-time commissioners who served with Zordel — Lorie Haber and Craig Hayman — were said to have resigned in protest of her appointment. Readers learned that five of eight part-time commissioners opposed the renewal of Zordel’s place among their ranks.

One of the bones of contention seems to be Zordel’s tendency to occasionally disagree with her fellow commissioners, taking a different view of what protecting investors entails. For example, her critics and the Globe thought it important to highlight that OSC records show Zordel was responsible for “two of only three dissents in OSC enforcement proceedings over the past decade.” 

Some Reflections on the Gamestop Saga

 

Those who possess the intestinal fortitude to board Wonderland’s monster roller coaster, the Leviathan, will experience the singular pleasure of parking their stomachs nearly 100 metres in the air, accelerating to a top speed of 148 kph, and (hopefully) renewing their acquaintance with terra firma (and sanity) about 2 minutes later.  A quick canvass of Gamestop’s recent share price  reveals a strikingly similar profile (and likely a similar effect on many of its investors).  The only difference is that in the Gamestop case, for many the return to terra firma and sanity are not likely to be either as smooth or as welcome. 

Prof. Anita Anand awarded the Yvan Allaire medal by the Royal Society of Canada

Wednesday, September 18, 2019

Professor Anita Anand, J.R. Kimber Chair in Investor Protection and Corporate GovernanceProf. Anita Anand, who holds the J.R. Kimber Chair in Investor Protection and Corporate Governance, has been awarded the Yvan Allaire Medal by the Royal Society of Canada.

Prof. Anita Anand writes "The time is ripe for a review of securities law" in the Globe and Mail

Wednesday, June 26, 2019

In a commentary in the Globe and Mail, Prof. Anita Anand points out that what is supposed to be a regular 5-year review of securities legislation by an advisory commission, required in the Ontario’s Securities Act, is long overdue ("The time is ripe for a review of securities law," June 25, 2019).

Read the full commentary on the Globe and Mail website, or below.

Lawyers’ Duties in an Age of Shareholder Activism

Program on Ethics in Law and Business

Lawyers’ Duties in an Age of Shareholder Activism

Thursday, May 2, 2019

8:30 AM – 11:30 AM 

Jackman Law Building, 78 Queen’s Park, Room J140

Prof. Anita Anand writes "What does 'reducing the regulatory burden’ mean?" in the Globe and Mail

Tuesday, March 26, 2019

In a commentary in the Globe and Mail, Prof. Anita Anand digs into what the commonly expressed concept of reducing the regulatory burden really means for securities regulation ("What does 'reducing the regulatory burden’ mean?", March 26, 2019).

Read the full commentary on the Globe and Mail website, or below.


What does 'reducing the regulatory burden’ mean?

By Anita Anand

March 26, 2019

Prof. Anita Anand writes "Doug Ford needs to step back and let Hydro One’s board do its job"

Tuesday, December 18, 2018

In a commentary in the Globe and Mail, Prof. Anita Anand assesses the negative impact of government intervention in the affairs of arm’s-length bodies that are not established to run as political entities, such as Hydro One ("Doug Ford needs to step back and let Hydro One’s board do its job," December 14, 2018).

Prof. Anita Anand writes "There’s one legal way to insider trade — but maybe there shouldn’t be"

Saturday, December 8, 2018

In a commentary in the Financial Post, Prof. Anita Anand analyzes Bombardier's Automatic Share Disposition Plan (ASDP), which allows executives to exercise their options and sell the resulting stock ("There’s one legal way to insider trade — but maybe there shouldn’t be," December 7, 2018).

Read the full story on the Financial Post website, or below.


 

Pages