John Archibald


Investor rights deserve to be strongly protected and enforced. I act for individual retail and institutional investors seeking to recover financial losses resulting from securities fraud, market manipulation, and the misrepresentation or non-disclosure of material information by public companies, their officers and directors, and their professional advisors. If you have suffered such losses and want to know more about pursuing an investor class action, or a group or individual suit, please contact me.

416-637-3152    416-637-3445

John Archibald



John is an experienced class action lawyer whose practice focuses on protecting consumer and investor rights. He regularly acts in cases involving dangerous or shoddy products; misleading advertising; improper billing practices involving hidden charges; breaches of trust and fiduciary duty; and misleading investor disclosure. He has a multi-jurisdictional practice and has appeared in matters before courts in British Columbia, Ontario, and California.



John received a Bachelor of Arts (Great Distinction) from McGill University and a Bachelor of Laws (Distinction) from the University of New Brunswick, where he graduated at the top of his law school class. He was on the Dean’s List in each year of his legal studies and was the recipient of numerous awards, including the Lieutenant Governor’s Medal. He subsequently received a Masters of Law degree from Harvard Law School. He was called to the Ontario Bar in 2003, the British Columbia Bar in 2014, and the Massachusetts Bar in 2018.

John has obtained the Chartered Alternative Investment Analyst designation and has also been designated a Derivatives Market Specialist (DMS) by the Canadian Securities Institute.  

Professional and Business Affiliations

Canadian Bar Association, Massachusetts Bar Association, Chartered Alternative Investment Analysts Association.  

Representative Cases

John has acted as counsel for:
• a proposed class of shareholders in a class action against a global financial institution for its failure to disclose allegedly serious and systemic violations of anti-money laundering and anti-terrorist financing laws;
• a proposed class of beneficiaries of an real estate investment trust in a class action claiming breach of trust and accessory liability;
• a class of shareholders in a securities class action against a TSX-listed body armour manufacturer based on the alleged non-disclosure of a significant contract with the U.S. Army;
• a class of shareholders in a securities class action against a TSX-listed engineering company based on the alleged non-disclosure of systemic bribery and corrupt practices within the company;
• a proposed class of shareholders in a securities class action against a Canadian bank based on the alleged non-disclosure of massive exposure to the U.S. housing market through derivative instruments;
• ten aggrieved investors who were victims of an alleged $30 million Ponzi scheme;
• a group of disabled employees in the Nortel insolvency proceedings;
• a Canadian mining company in an oppression action commenced by the company’s bondholders;
• an institutional noteholder during the August 2007 liquidity crisis in the Canadian asset-backed commercial paper market;
• a retail investor in a negligence and breach of fiduciary duty action against an investment advisor;
• a shareholder in an oppression action against the company’s director for misappropriation of a corporate opportunity;
• a Canadian technology company and its directors in an oppression action brought by a minority shareholder;
• a pharmaceutical company in a class action based on alleged violations of provincial consumer protection legislation;
• an American bank in various CCAA proceedings involving automobile parts suppliers;
• the secured lender in the interim receivership and bankruptcy of a Canadian alternative-fuel technology company;
• the United States of America in judgment enforcement proceedings, which included winning the dismissal of an appeal. United States of America v. Shield Development Co. and Anyox Metals Ltd., (2005), 74 O.R. (3d) 595 (CA.), aff’g (2005), 74 O.R. (3d) 583 (S.C.J.).

Reported Decisions

Locking v. McCowan, 2016 ONCA 88

Locking v. McCowan, 2015 ONSC 4435

Frank v. Caldwell, 2014 ONSC  1

Green v. Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, 2014 ONCA 90, reversing 2012 ONSC 3637

The Trustees of the Drywall Acoustic Lathing and Insulation Local 675 Pension Fund v. SNC-Lavalin Group Inc.,  112 O.R. (3d) 569 (S.C.J.)

Frank v. Farlie, Turner & Co., LLC (2012), 113 O.R. (3d) 25 (S.C.J.)

Smith v. Sino-Forest Corporation, 34 C.P.C. (7th) 76 (Ont. S.C.J.)

United States of America v. Shield Development Co. and Anyox Metals Ltd., (2005), 74 O.R. (3d) 595 (C.A.), aff’g (2005), 74 O.R. (3d) 583 (S.C.J.).



John Archibald, “Securities Class Actions in Canada: The Statutory Leave Process and Its Implications for Parallel U.S. Proceedings”, Bloomberg Law Reports (February 2010).

John Archibald, “The Impact of Recent Reforms to Canada’s Insolvency Regime”, Bloomberg Law Reports (November 2009).

John R. Archibald and Cynthia L. Law, “The Transnationalization of Class Actions: Canadian and American Approaches to Jurisdiction Over Foreign Claimants” (2006) North Am. Corp. Lwyr., Vol. IX, No. 1 at 489.

H. Scott Fairley and John R. Archibald, “After the Hague: Some Thoughts On The Impact on Canadian Law of the Convention on Choice of Court Agreements” (2006) ILSA J. Int’l & Comp. L., Vol. 12:2 at 417.

H. Scott Fairley and John R. Archibald, “Corporate Canada Beware: A New Canadian Status Quo for the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments” (2005) North Am. Corp. Lwyr., Vol. VIII, No. 3 at 1.

H. Scott Fairley and John R. Archibald, “Litigation Risk and the Mixed Panacea of Arbitration for the Small Business Exporter” (Paper presented at CLE conference “Advising the Small Business Exporter”, 30 May 2005) Ontario Bar Association.

Contact John