Darren McKall

The Filer applied for exemptive relief on behalf of the Fund to permit the inclusion of past performance data in sales communications, fund facts documents, and management reports of fund performance, despite the data relating to a period before the Fund offered its units under a simplified prospectus.

The Ontario Securities Commission granted the requested exemptions, subject to conditions requiring disclosure that the Fund was not a reporting issuer during the relevant period and that expenses would have been higher had it been subject to reporting issuer requirements.

The Filer applied to the Ontario Securities Commission for exemptive relief to extend the time limit for the renewal of the long form prospectus of several exchange-traded mutual funds.

The extension was sought to align the lapse date with other funds managed by the Filer, thereby reducing renewal and printing costs.

The Commission granted the requested exemption, finding it would not be prejudicial to the public interest.

The Filer applied for exemptive relief on behalf of its current and future mutual funds to allow them to purchase fixed income securities under Rule 144A of the US Securities Act without those securities being classified as 'illiquid assets' under National Instrument 81-102.

The principal regulator granted the relief, finding that 144A Securities trade in an active institutional market and can be liquid relative to a fund's need to satisfy redemptions, provided the funds qualify as Qualified Institutional Buyers at the time of purchase.

Fidelity Investments Canada ULC applied for exemptive relief from the cash cover requirement in section 2.8(1)(d) of National Instrument 81-102.

The relief sought to permit its mutual funds and exchange-traded funds to use receivables from distributions or dividends as cover for long positions in standardized futures.

The Ontario Securities Commission granted the exemption, provided the funds hold a combination of the receivable, cash cover, and margin that equals the underlying market exposure of the futures position.

The Filer, Canada Life Investment Management Ltd., applied to the Ontario Securities Commission for exemptive relief to extend the lapse date of the simplified prospectus for several of its funds.

The Filer sought to align the renewal of these funds' prospectuses with those of other funds it manages to reduce costs and streamline disclosure under the new Form 81-101F1.

The Commission found that the requested relief would not be prejudicial to the public interest and granted the extension.

The applicant, an investment fund manager, applied for exemptive relief from subsection 5.1(4) of National Instrument 81-101 to permit the consolidation of simplified prospectuses for its alternative mutual funds with those of its conventional mutual funds.

The applicant argued that consolidation would reduce costs and facilitate easier comparison for investors, noting that similar consolidation is permitted for exchange-traded funds under National Instrument 41-101.

The principal regulator granted the requested exemption, finding it met the statutory test.

The Filer applied for exemptive relief from paragraphs 15.3(4)(c) and 15.3(4)(f) of National Instrument 81-102 to permit the Funds to reference FundGrade Ratings, FundGrade A+ Awards, Lipper Leader Ratings, and Lipper Awards in their sales communications.

The principal regulator granted the exemption, subject to conditions requiring specific disclosure about the ratings and awards, including the category, number of funds, ranking entity, and methodology.

The Filers applied on behalf of various investment funds for exemptive relief from the illiquid asset restrictions in National Instrument 81-102.

They sought to exempt purchases of 144A Securities by Qualified Institutional Buyers from being considered illiquid assets.

The principal regulator granted the exemption, finding that 144A Securities trade in an active institutional market and can be liquid relative to a fund's need to satisfy redemptions, provided certain conditions are met.

The Filer applied for exemptive relief under section 19.1 of National Instrument 81-102 to permit its mutual funds to use unrated short-term debt issued or guaranteed by sovereign states as cash cover for derivative transactions under section 2.8.

The principal regulator granted the relief, provided the sovereign state has a high credit rating and other rated short-term debt meeting the designated rating requirement.

The Filer applied to the Ontario Securities Commission for exemptive relief on behalf of proposed and future exchange-traded funds (ETFs).

The requested relief sought exemptions from the requirement to include an underwriter's certificate in the ETFs' prospectuses and from the take-over bid requirements for purchasers of ETF securities in the normal course on a marketplace.

The Commission granted the requested exemptions, noting that authorized dealers do not perform conventional underwriting services and that the application of take-over bid requirements could adversely impact the liquidity of the ETF securities.

The Filer applied for exemptive relief on behalf of an interval fund to permit it to deviate from certain requirements under National Instruments 41-101, 81-101, 81-102, and 81-106, as well as the Securities Act.

The relief sought included exemptions related to prospectus delivery, payment of redemption proceeds, illiquid asset restrictions, concentration restrictions, control restrictions, and NAV calculation frequency.

The Ontario Securities Commission granted the requested relief, subject to specific conditions designed to ensure adequate disclosure, liquidity management, and investor protection.

The filer applied for exemptive relief to extend the lapse dates of the prospectuses for several exchange-traded funds.

The extension was requested to align the renewal dates of these funds with other funds managed by the filer, thereby reducing renewal, printing, and related costs by combining them into single prospectuses.

The principal regulator granted the requested relief, noting no material changes in the funds' affairs and that the extension would not be prejudicial to the public interest.

Mackenzie Financial Corporation applied for exemptive relief under National Instrument 81-102 to permit the reorganization of certain mutual funds into corresponding Canada Life funds.

The applicant also sought relief from the prohibition against a fund holding more than 10% of its net asset value in other investment funds, to allow top funds to continue investing in the reorganized funds.

The Ontario Securities Commission granted the requested relief, subject to conditions including unitholder approval and compliance with portfolio holdings disclosure requirements.

The Filer, SLGI Asset Management Inc., applied on behalf of two funds for an order that each fund has ceased to be a reporting issuer in all jurisdictions of Canada.

The principal regulator found that the outstanding securities of each fund are beneficially owned by fewer than 15 securityholders in each jurisdiction and fewer than 51 worldwide, and no securities are traded on a marketplace.

The order was granted.

The applicant investment fund manager applied for exemptive relief to extend the lapse dates of the prospectuses for several exchange-traded funds.

The extension was sought to align the renewal dates of these prospectuses with those of other funds managed by the applicant, thereby reducing renewal costs and streamlining disclosure.

The Ontario Securities Commission granted the requested relief, finding it would not be prejudicial to the public interest.

The applicant, Beutel, Goodman & Company Ltd., applied for exemptive relief from the requirements of paragraphs 15.3(4)(c) and 15.3(4)(f) of National Instrument 81-102 Investment Funds.

The relief was sought to permit the applicant's mutual funds to reference FundGrade A+ Awards, FundGrade Ratings, Lipper Awards, and Lipper Leader Ratings in their sales communications.

The principal regulator granted the exemption, subject to specific disclosure conditions regarding the ratings and awards.

Middlefield Limited applied for exemptive relief on behalf of its mutual funds from the sales communication requirements in paragraphs 15.3(4)(c) and 15.3(4)(f) of National Instrument 81-102.

The applicant sought permission to reference FundGrade Ratings, FundGrade A+ Awards, Lipper Leader Ratings, and Lipper Awards in its sales communications, which would otherwise be prohibited due to matching and timing restrictions.

The Ontario Securities Commission granted the exemption, subject to specific disclosure conditions and time limits on the use of the awards.

Fidelity Investments Canada ULC applied for exemptive relief from the multi-tier fund of funds prohibition in clause 2.5(2)(b) of National Instrument 81-102.

The relief was sought to permit Fidelity Funds to invest in the Fidelity Inflation Focused Fund, which in turn invests up to 10% of its net assets in third-tier funds and up to 10% in commodity ETFs.

The Ontario Securities Commission granted the exemption, subject to conditions ensuring no duplication of fees, fair allocation of transaction costs, and compliance with top 25 portfolio holdings disclosure requirements.

True Exposure Investments Inc., the investment fund manager of the TruX Exogenous Risk Pool, applied for exemptive relief under section 6.1 of National Instrument 81-101.

The applicant sought relief from subsection 2.1(2), which prohibits filing a prospectus more than 90 days after the receipt of a preliminary prospectus.

The Director of the Ontario Securities Commission granted the requested exemption, permitting the prospectus to be filed no later than January 27, 2022.

The Filer applied for exemptive relief on behalf of an alternative mutual fund to permit the fund to include past performance data from the period before it became a reporting issuer in its management reports of fund performance, fund facts, and sales communications.

The principal regulator granted the requested relief, subject to conditions including disclosure that the fund was not a reporting issuer during the relevant period and that its expenses would have been higher had it been subject to reporting issuer requirements.