Environmental Law Labour and Employment Law
Barry Weintraub
Recognized in Best Lawyers since 2018 Awarded Practice Areas
Biography
Barry is a founding partner of Weintraub Huang LLP. Barry's practice includes litigation of civil & corporate/commercial, environmental and employment matters.
Barry is an experienced and successful trial and appellate counsel. He has made more than 1500 appearances in various types of proceedings before various courts at all stages of litigation and has also appeared before several different administrative tribunals. Barry has acted as counsel in numerous mediations and commercial arbitrations.
Barry is Past-Chair of the Civil Litigation Section and Environmental Law Section of the Ontario Bar Association and the National Environment, Energy and Resources Law Section of the Canadian Bar Association. He was previously an adjunct professor of law teaching an advanced Civil Litigation course for many years at the University of Toronto Faculty of Law and Queen's University Faculty of Law. He writes and speaks frequently on a variety of commercial, environmental and employment litigation issues.
Barry is recognized as a leading Canadian lawyer in various ranking publications including Benchmark Canada, Best Lawyers in Canada and Lexpert magazine
CIVIL & CORPORATE/COMMERCIAL LITIGATIONBarry has experience in various specialized areas of civil & corporate/commercial litigation, including corporate transaction disputes, shareholder remedies, contract claims, banking and investment management, injunctions, regulatory proceedings, construction matters, professional negligence, estates/trusts, defamation, real estate litigation and fraud. He has handled large, complex matters involving co-ordination of litigation team efforts and extensive documentary and factual circumstances.
ENVIRONMENTAL LAWBarry has experience in all aspects of environmental litigation, including civil litigation of liability for cleanups of historical contamination, appeals of regulatory orders and defence of environmental prosecutions. His clients include large and small corporations, insurance companies, financial institutions, professionals and individuals. He has acted in many leading environmental law cases.
EMPLOYMENT LITIGATIONBarry is an experienced workplace investigator in fraud, discrimination and harassment cases and has an extensive practice in employment law matters, including cases involving wrongful dismissal, restrictive covenants and human rights. He was counsel for the successful complainant in the historic Tahmourpour v. RCMP case before the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal and Federal Court of Appeal, and has also acted in several administrative hearings, judicial reviews and constitutional cases.
Overview
- Ontario, 1989
- Canadian Bar Association National Environment, Energy and Resources Law Section - Chair 2017-2018, Vice-Chair 2016-2017, Treasurer 2015-2016, Secretary 2014-2015, Executive member 2008-2014
- Oak Ridges Moraine Land Trust - Director, 2014-2015
- Ontario Bar Association Civil Litigation Section - Past Chair 2016-2017, Chair 2015-2016, Vice-Chair 2014-2015, CLE Co-ordinator 2012-2014, Programming Co-ordinator 2011-2012
- Ontario Bar Association Environmental Law Section - Past Chair 2010-2012, Chair 2008-2010, Vice-Chair 2006-2008, Programming Co-ordinator 1996-1998, Executive Member 1993-2018
- Ontario, 1989
- Canadian Bar Association National Environment, Energy and Resources Law Section - Chair 2017-2018, Vice-Chair 2016-2017, Treasurer 2015-2016, Secretary 2014-2015, Executive member 2008-2014
- Oak Ridges Moraine Land Trust - Director, 2014-2015
- Ontario Bar Association Civil Litigation Section - Past Chair 2016-2017, Chair 2015-2016, Vice-Chair 2014-2015, CLE Co-ordinator 2012-2014, Programming Co-ordinator 2011-2012
- Ontario Bar Association Environmental Law Section - Past Chair 2010-2012, Chair 2008-2010, Vice-Chair 2006-2008, Programming Co-ordinator 1996-1998, Executive Member 1993-2018
Client Testimonials
Awards & Focus
Recognized in The Best Lawyers in Canada™ 2026 for work in:
- Environmental Law
- Labour and Employment Law
Awards:
Best Lawyers in Canada - Environmental Law
Lexpert Leading Practitioner in Environmental Law since 2012
2015 Global Law Experts Awards -- Environment Litigation Lawyer of the Year in Canada
2015 Corporate Intl Magazine Legal Awards -
News & Media
Additional Information
Case History
Cases
- Tahmourpour v. Canada (Solicitor General) -- Lack of Thorough Investigation
Tahmourpour v. Canada (Solicitor General), 2005 FCA 113 (CanLII).
Federal Court of Appeal held Canadian Human Rights Commission investigator of complaint of racial discrimination failed to investigate "obviously crucial evidence."
Federal Court of Appeal held Canadian Human Rights Commission investigator of complaint of racial discrimination failed to investigate "obviously crucial evidence."
- Tahmourpour v. RCMP -- Individual and Systemic Discrimination
Tahmourpour v. Royal Canadian Mounted Police, 2008 CHRT 10 (CanLII)
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal found individual and systemic discrimination on prohibited grounds by the RCMP against Tahmourpour.
Specific findings include:
1. the effect of the RCMP's policy with respect to dress and hygiene and Sgt. Hebert's announcement about Mr. Tahmourpour's religious pendant was to adversely differentiate against Mr. Tahmourpour on the basis of his religion.
2. Corporal Boyer made a derogatory comment about Mr. Tahmourpour's signature that was based on a prohibited ground of discrimination. He also adversely differentiated against Mr. Tahmourpour on the basis of a prohibited ground by being especially verbally abusive and hostile towards Mr. Tahmourpour at Depot.
3. Mr. Tahmourpour was not provided with a non-discriminatory environment in which to develop and demonstrate his communication skills.
4. Corporal Jacques was influenced by Corporal Boyer's racist attitude towards Mr. Tahmourpour and responded to that influence by providing an inaccurate evaluation of Mr. Tahmourpour's performance ...and that discrimination was a factor in the Feedback.
5. Given the direct and circumstantial evidence of Corporal Boyer's discriminatory attitude toward Mr. Tahmourpour, Mr. Tahmourpour's race, religion and/or ethnic or national background was a factor in Corporal Boyer's assessment of the cleanliness of Mr. Tahmourpour's pistol on both September 9 and September 28, 1999.... Corporal Boyer's request for file review was improper and was based, at least in part, on a prohibited ground of discrimination.
6. In a training environment where derogatory comments about race are condoned and directed at people like Mr. Tahmourpour, where evaluations are inaccurate and improper, and where instructors take pride in being politically incorrect, it is difficult for someone like Mr. Tahmourpour to develop and demonstrate his skills in these areas. [It is] reasonable to infer that such conditions erode one's confidence and ability to perform well.... Mr. Tahmourpour's performance was ... affected by the discrimination to which he was exposed.
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal found individual and systemic discrimination on prohibited grounds by the RCMP against Tahmourpour.
Specific findings include:
1. the effect of the RCMP's policy with respect to dress and hygiene and Sgt. Hebert's announcement about Mr. Tahmourpour's religious pendant was to adversely differentiate against Mr. Tahmourpour on the basis of his religion.
2. Corporal Boyer made a derogatory comment about Mr. Tahmourpour's signature that was based on a prohibited ground of discrimination. He also adversely differentiated against Mr. Tahmourpour on the basis of a prohibited ground by being especially verbally abusive and hostile towards Mr. Tahmourpour at Depot.
3. Mr. Tahmourpour was not provided with a non-discriminatory environment in which to develop and demonstrate his communication skills.
4. Corporal Jacques was influenced by Corporal Boyer's racist attitude towards Mr. Tahmourpour and responded to that influence by providing an inaccurate evaluation of Mr. Tahmourpour's performance ...and that discrimination was a factor in the Feedback.
5. Given the direct and circumstantial evidence of Corporal Boyer's discriminatory attitude toward Mr. Tahmourpour, Mr. Tahmourpour's race, religion and/or ethnic or national background was a factor in Corporal Boyer's assessment of the cleanliness of Mr. Tahmourpour's pistol on both September 9 and September 28, 1999.... Corporal Boyer's request for file review was improper and was based, at least in part, on a prohibited ground of discrimination.
6. In a training environment where derogatory comments about race are condoned and directed at people like Mr. Tahmourpour, where evaluations are inaccurate and improper, and where instructors take pride in being politically incorrect, it is difficult for someone like Mr. Tahmourpour to develop and demonstrate his skills in these areas. [It is] reasonable to infer that such conditions erode one's confidence and ability to perform well.... Mr. Tahmourpour's performance was ... affected by the discrimination to which he was exposed.
- Chitel v. Bank of Montreal -- Partipation in Breach of Fiduciary Duty
Chitel v. Bank of Montreal, 2002 CanLII 49645 (ON SC)
Successfully defended Bank against alleged participation in breach of fiduciary duty by co-owner of property.
Successfully defended Bank against alleged participation in breach of fiduciary duty by co-owner of property.
- Couper v. Nu-Life -- Summary Judgment Motion re Oppression limitation periods
Couper v. Nu-Life Corp., 2013 ONSC 257 (CanLII)
Successfully resisted summary judgment motion alleging particulars of oppression should be dismissed as statute barred by expiry of limitation period.
Successfully resisted summary judgment motion alleging particulars of oppression should be dismissed as statute barred by expiry of limitation period.
- Gaffney v. Ontario (Environment and Climate Change) -- Stay Pending Appeal of Director's Order
Gaffney v. Ontario (Environment and Climate Change), 2015 CanLII 15555 (ON ERT)
- Maasland v. City of Toronto -- Constructive Dismissal
Maasland v City of Toronto, 2015 ONSC 7598 (CanLII); Maasland v. Toronto (City), 2016 ONCA 551 (CanLII)
Court found client had been constructively dismissed by City of Toronto and awarded 26 months' damages in lieu of reasonable notice. On appeal, Court of Appeal confirmed no lack of reasonable mitigation of damages.
Court found client had been constructively dismissed by City of Toronto and awarded 26 months' damages in lieu of reasonable notice. On appeal, Court of Appeal confirmed no lack of reasonable mitigation of damages.
- Barker v. The Queen -- Canada Revenue Agency discovery of non-parties
Barker v. The Queen, 2012 TCC 64 (CanLII)
Successfully resisted application by Canada Revenue Agency for discovery of non-party in litigation regarding tax credits.
Successfully resisted application by Canada Revenue Agency for discovery of non-party in litigation regarding tax credits.
- Breslin v. Breslin -- Setting aside Dismissal of Action
Breslin v. Breslin, 2006 CanLII 50893 (ON SCDC)
On appeal to Divisional Court, successfully set aside dismissal of client's action.
On appeal to Divisional Court, successfully set aside dismissal of client's action.
- 781332 Ontario Inc. v. Mortgage Insurance Co. of Canada -- Removal of Lawyers from Record
781332 Ontario Inc. v. Mortgage Insurance Co. of Canada (Gen. Div.), 1991 CanLII 7076 (ON SC)
- Crombie v. McColl-Frontenac -- Limitation Periods in Environmental Claims
Crombie v McColl-Frontenac, 2015 ONSC 6560 (CanLII); overturned on appeal Crombie Property Holdings Limited v. McColl-Frontenac Inc. (Texaco Canada Limited), 2017 ONCA 16 (CanLII)
Motion judge dismissed action against client on basis limitation period expired since plaintiff knew of information giving rise to action more than two years before claim commenced. Court of Appeal overturned.
Motion judge dismissed action against client on basis limitation period expired since plaintiff knew of information giving rise to action more than two years before claim commenced. Court of Appeal overturned.
- Royal Bank v. Gentra Canada Investments Inc. -- Cross-collateralization of Letters of Credit
Royal Bank v. Gentra Canada Investments Inc., 2000 CanLII 22796 (ON SC)
Successfully defended solicitors in negligence claim alleging improper cross-collateralization of letters of credit posted as security for shopping plaza financing.
Successfully defended solicitors in negligence claim alleging improper cross-collateralization of letters of credit posted as security for shopping plaza financing.
Your browser is not fully compatible with our automatic printer friendly formatting.
Please use the print button to print this profile page.