Dave Hill LL.B., B.A.
Dave’s practice encompasses virtually all aspects of civil litigation, including corporate/commercial litigation, arbitrations and mediation. His expertise in trial and appellate advocacy is reflected in a number of leading cases in many different areas of law, including recent cases involving the economic torts, environmental claims, and significant contractual disputes. As one of the leading civil litigation lawyers in Manitoba, he has appeared in trial courts of Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and the Federal Court, as well as in the Manitoba Court of Appeal, the Federal Court of Appeal, the Tax Court of Canada, and the Supreme Court of Canada.
He was selected by The Lexpert Special Edition: Litigation 2020 featuring Lexpert ranked lawyers in the Business Litigation space. In January 2020 and again in 2021, Best Lawyers Canada selected him for Civil Litigation.
In 2021, Benchmark Canada selected him as Litigator of the Year – Manitoba, for the fifth time in eight years. Most recently, in 2020, he was one of four civil litigators in Canada named by Benchmark to be part of their Benchmark Hall of Fame Award.
In December 2018, he was selected as one of the top civil litigators in Lexpert’s Report on Business in the Globe and Mail.
He is ranked in Lexpert in the areas of Commercial Insurance Litigation and Corporate/Commercial Litigation. He is included in the Lexpert/American Lawyer Guide to the Leading 500 Lawyers in Canada for corporate commercial litigation.
He was the first Manitoba litigator to be selected as a Fellow of the Litigation Counsel of America, a trial lawyer honorary society. He received the Martindale Hubbell 2018 Judicial Edition ranking as “AV Preeminent” representing the highest possible rating in both legal ability and ethical standards reflecting the confidential opinions of members of the Bar and judiciary.
Dave was selected as the sole Manitoban in 2009 by Law Day Leading Lawyers in North America as one of the top 36 leading lawyers in Canada in the area of appellate advocacy. He has once again been included in the latest edition of The Best Lawyers in Canada in 6 practice areas including Alternative Dispute Resolution, Bet-the-Company Litigation, Corporate and Commercial Litigation, and Insurance Law.
From 1983-1989 he served as a Bencher of the Law Society of Manitoba. He has presented papers at numerous CLE programs put on by the Law Society of Manitoba over the years, including the 1981, 1983 and 1999 Pitblado Lectures. He was the co-chairman of the 1991 Pitblado Lectures with The Honourable Peter S. Morse, Q.C., former counsel to the firm.
From 1978-1988 he taught at the University of Manitoba Law School in the subjects of agency and insurance law. In the mid-1980’s he was one of the original faculty members of the annual Advocacy Seminar put on by the Law Society of Manitoba. He has published articles for the Manitoba Law Journal and the Legal Research Institute of Manitoba.
LL.B., University of Manitoba Faculty of Law, 1975 B.A., Dartmouth College, 1971
Areas of Expertise
- Corporate / Commercial Litigation
- Commercial Insurance Litigation
- Environmental Litigation
- Professional Liability
- Professional Discipline
- Personal Injury
- Products Liability
- Wrongful Dismissal
- Securities Litigation
- Regulatory Affairs
- Construction Litigation
- Litigation against Municipal & Provincial Governments
Experience & Accreditation
Limitation Dates in Manitoba
- Rarie v Maxwell,  M.J. No. 613,  M.J. No. 588 (landmark case in Manitoba that the judge made discoverability rule does not apply in Manitoba)
- Hughes v Bob Tallman Investments Inc.,  M.J. No. 214,  MJ No. 16 (landmark case in Manitoba that the limitation date for oppression remedy is 6 years from discovery of oppression reversing earlier Court of Appeal decision that the limitation date was 6 years from date cause of action arose)
- Danylchuk v Ataliotis & Wolinsky,  M.J. No. 80 (affirmed on appeal) (judge in first instance ordered the return of half of the investors’ money – motion granted based on affidavit material alone)
- Katz v Babkat, (2011 MBQB 276) (affirmed on appeal 2012 MBCA 68) Successfully obtained an oppression order against a 50% partner in a revenue producing business.
- Hatskin v Prober et al, (2011 MBQB 216) Successfully defended an oppression application on behalf a 50% owner of a privately held company with revenue properties.
Note: In all three of these cases, our clients were successful notwithstanding that Mr. Hill chose not to cross-examine any of the opposing parties on their affidavits.
- Rady v Silpit Industries, 2014 MBQB 145 Obtained a just and equitable order under s.207 of The Corporations Act, with the Judge finding in favour of our clients that their shares be bought out at fair value by the defendant corporation or the other shareholders in a small privately held company. Determination of fair value to be decided by an arbitrator. Value of the corporation approximately $9M
- Tapper v Tapper, QB File CI10-01-69727 Obtained an order requiring the 75% shareholder in a small privately held company to buy out the 25% shareholder, with the valuation to be determined by a Queen’s Bench Judge at a hearing in early December, 2014. Valuation of the real estate assets of the holding company between $80M – $100M
Breach of Contract
- CAE Industries Ltd. v Her Majesty the Queen,  F.C.J. No. 605 (letter from three Cabinet Ministers said to be political assurance was found to be a valid and enforceable agreement with judgment for the plaintiff in excess of $2.0 million)
- Domo Gasoline Corporation Ltd. v Shell Canada Limited,  M.J. No. 392 (collateral contract enforced and judgment in favour of the plaintiff for over $6 million)
- Barcode Systems Inc. v Symbol Technologies Canada Inc.,  M.J. No. 4 (under appeal) (two issues of interpretation severed for the purpose of trial – interpretation most favourable to defendant accepted by the court, effectively removing plaintiff’s claim for over $3.0 million)
Wrongfully Inducing Breach of Contract
- Chalmers v Dominion Lumber Winnipeg Ltd. and others,  M.J. No. 312 (officers and directors of contracting corporation found liable)
- W. Holdings v T.,  MBQB 58 (officers and directors of contracting corporation found liable; punitive damages awarded)
- Mount Baker Enterprises v Big Rig Collision Inc.,  M.J. No. 118,  M.J. No. 581
- Bird Construction v Theo C. Ltd,  M.J. No. 86,  MBCA 17 (under cost plus contract, contractor awarded the full amount owing and owner’s counterclaim for alleged deficiencies dismissed in total)
- TransCanada PipeLines Limited v The Government of Manitoba Successfully defended the Government of Manitoba, Taxation Department, in a suit by TransCanada PipeLines Limited to set aside a tax assessment of $3.0 million (later overturned on appeal)
- 2261324 Manitoba Ltd. v Domo Gasoline Corporation Ltd.,  M.J. No. 488,  M.J. No. 238 (affirmed on appeal) (application for mandatory injunction by landlord to require remediation by the tenant during the currency of the lease dismissed)
- Westfair Properties Ltd. v Domo Gasoline Corporation Ltd.,  M.J. No. 1,  M.J. No. 532 (affirmed on appeal) (action for damages in breach of contract, negligence, nuisance, escape of dangerous substance dismissed)
Ontario Superior Court
- Pikangikum First Nation v Nault, (2010 ONSC 5122) Successfully defended a former Federal Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs in a case alleging misfeasance in public office where, if liability had been found, the damages were approximately $50 million.
Vicarious Liability for the Actions of an Agent
- Mignault v Great West Life Assurance Company, 2013 MBQB 300. Successfully represented two customers of the defendant corporation in a suit against the defendant corporation for the fraudulent actions of one of its agents. Damages in the area of $600,000 were awarded.
- Hoffman v Heinrichs, 2012 MBQB 133, 2013 MBCA 63 . Successfully defended the sole beneficiary of an estate worth over $2 million against claims of lack of testamentary capacity, duress and undue influence.
- Lake Louise Limited Partnership v Canad Corporations of Manitoba Ltd., 2013 MBQB 67. Succeeded in having the Court of Queen’s Bench adopt an interpretation of a “gross revenues” clause in a limited partnership agreement arising out of the joint ownership of a Winnipeg and Brandon casino and hotel operation. Going forward, the result means that the defendant Canad will obtain hundreds of thousands of dollars each year for the balance of the limited partnership agreement up to 2025.
Mandamus and Contempt
- The City of Winnipeg was found in contempt for failing to abide by the Mandamus Order. 6165347 Manitoba Inc. et al v The City of Winnipeg 2019 MBQB 121
Supreme Court of Canada
- Dave appeared before the Supreme Court of Canada on January 19th, 2015 in the case of Stuart Olson Dominion Ltd., formerly known as Dominion Construction Company Inc. v Structal Heavy Steel, A Division of Canam Group Inc.  SCC 43, a leading case in relation to the trust provisions of builder’s lien legislation.
- Marchischuk v Dominion Industrial Supplies Ltd.,  M.J. No. 75,  M.J. No. 545,  S.C.J. No. 44 (adjuster’s conduct after limitation date expired not amounting to estoppel)
- Siemens (Winkler Inn) v Attorney General of Manitoba,  M.J. No. 417,  M.J. No. 588,  1 S.C.R. 6 (provincial legislation providing local option to hold a referendum on VLTs ruled constitutional)
Arbitration Matters of Public Record
- Domo Gasoline Corporation Ltd. v 2129752 Manitoba Ltd., 2014 MBQB 87 Obtained leave to appeal (Joyal J, January 15, 2014) an arbitrator’s award and then successfully appealed the arbitrator’s award. The result was the matter was remitted back to the arbitrator to hear further evidence.
Outside the practice of law, he has served on the Board of Directors of the Manitoba Heart & Stroke Foundation, St. Charles Country Club, St. John’s-Ravenscourt High School and the Winnipeg Football Club. His hobbies have included golf and coaching hockey at the high school level. He is married with two adult children.