Paulette L. Kennedy

The Filer, a United States issuer and wholly-owned subsidiary of DTE Energy Company, applied for a decision under the securities legislation of Ontario, British Columbia, Alberta, and Saskatchewan that it is not a reporting issuer.

The Filer has a de minimis market presence in Canada, with residents of Canada holding less than 2% of its outstanding debt securities and comprising less than 2% of its total securityholders worldwide.

The Filer's securities are not listed on any stock exchange or publicly traded on a marketplace.

The Ontario Securities Commission, acting as principal regulator, granted the requested exemptive relief.

The Filer, CI Investments Inc., applied to the Ontario Securities Commission for exemptive relief to extend the lapse date of the simplified prospectuses for several mutual funds.

The extension was requested to permit the continued distribution of securities until the funds could be merged into other mutual funds managed by the Filer.

The Commission granted the requested exemption, finding that the extension would not affect the currency or accuracy of the information contained in the prospectuses and would not be prejudicial to the public interest.

The filer, Elliott & Page Limited, applied to the Ontario Securities Commission for exemptive relief from the requirement to deliver a renewal prospectus to mutual fund investors who purchase units pursuant to pre-authorized investment plans.

The Commission granted the relief, subject to conditions including that participants are notified they will not receive a renewal prospectus unless requested, they retain a misrepresentation right of action, and they can terminate their participation in the investment plan at any time.

The applicant, Solium Capital Inc., applied for exemptive relief from the dealer registration and prospectus requirements of the Securities Act in respect of trades in mutual fund securities to tax-assisted capital accumulation plans (CAPs).

The Ontario Securities Commission granted the requested relief, subject to conditions including that plan sponsors provide CAP members with specific information about the mutual funds, fees, and performance, and that the funds comply with National Instrument 81-102.

Staff of the Ontario Securities Commission brought a hearing under section 127 of the Securities Act regarding Magna International Inc.'s proposed plan of arrangement to collapse its multiple voting share structure.

Staff alleged the management information circular lacked sufficient information and the transaction was contrary to the public interest.

The Commission found the proposed transaction was not abusive, but concluded the circular failed to provide shareholders with sufficient disclosure to make an informed decision, particularly given the lack of a board recommendation and the transaction's nature as a related party transaction.

The Commission ordered that the circular be amended to include specific material information, including financial analysis and alternatives considered by the special committee, before the shareholder vote could proceed.

Franklin Templeton Investments Corp. applied for exemptive relief from subsection 5.1(a) of National Instrument 81-105 to permit it to pay participating dealers direct costs for Cooperative Marketing Initiatives whose primary purpose is providing educational information concerning tax or estate planning matters.

The Ontario Securities Commission granted the exemption, subject to conditions including that the information provided is general, no sales are required, and the exemption expires in two years.

The Filer, NEXX Systems, Inc., applied for exemptive relief from the prospectus and registration requirements under the Securities Act to permit the posting of electronic roadshow materials on commercial websites during the waiting period of a cross-border initial public offering.

Compliance with U.S. SEC rules required unrestricted access to these materials, which conflicted with Canadian requirements for password protection.

The Ontario Securities Commission granted the relief, subject to conditions including the provision of a contractual right of action for misrepresentation to Canadian purchasers.

The applicant, an investment advisor, sought a stay of an Ontario Securities Commission decision dismissing his application for a hearing and review of an IIROC disciplinary decision.

The IIROC hearing panel had permanently banned the applicant and imposed a fine and costs for having undisclosed financial interests in client accounts.

The Commission considered the RJR MacDonald test for granting a stay pending appeal.

Finding that the Divisional Court was in a better position to determine the merits of the appeal and whether a stay should be granted, the Commission granted a short 60-day extension of the interim stay to allow the applicant to commence an appeal and bring a stay motion before the Divisional Court.

The applicant sought a hearing and review of a decision by the Ontario District Council of the Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada (IIROC), which found he engaged in conduct unbecoming by having an undisclosed financial interest in client accounts.

The Ontario Securities Commission applied a restrained approach to reviewing the self-regulatory organization's decision, finding that the applicant failed to demonstrate that the District Council proceeded on an incorrect principle, erred in law, or overlooked material evidence.

The application was dismissed.

The applicant, acting as plan sponsor and administrator of a group registered retirement savings plan, applied for exemptive relief from the dealer registration and prospectus requirements of the Securities Act.

The relief was sought in respect of trades in securities of mutual funds to plan members.

The Ontario Securities Commission granted the requested relief, subject to conditions including the provision of specific information, performance reporting, and investment decision-making tools to plan members.

The filer, Goodman & Company, Investment Management Inc., applied for exemptive relief on behalf of several mutual funds to permit them to invest in units of the Dundee Real Estate Investment Trust (Dundee REIT).

The funds were prohibited from making such investments under the Securities Act because they were considered related mutual funds to the Dundee REIT.

The Ontario Securities Commission granted the requested relief, subject to conditions including that the investments be approved by each fund's independent review committee and be consistent with the funds' investment objectives.

The applicants, minority shareholders of MI Developments Inc. (MID), brought applications under sections 104 and 127 of the Securities Act alleging that MID failed to comply with Multilateral Instrument 61-101 (MI 61-101) by not obtaining minority shareholder approval for a series of related party transactions with Magna Entertainment Corp. (MEC).

The transactions included loans, loan extensions, and debtor-in-possession financing.

The Ontario Securities Commission dismissed the applications, finding that section 104 does not apply to related party transactions.

While the Commission permitted the applications under section 127, it concluded that MID was entitled to rely on the downstream transaction exception and the market capitalization exemption under MI 61-101.

The Commission also found no prima facie case of insider trading in connection with a related trust transaction.

The Independent Financial Brokers of Canada (IFBC) applied for a review of the Ontario Securities Commission's decision to approve an amendment to a Mutual Fund Dealers Association (MFDA) by-law.

The MFDA and Commission Staff challenged the panel's jurisdiction and the IFBC's standing.

The hearing panel dismissed the application, finding it lacked jurisdiction under sections 21.7, 21.1(4), and 144 of the Securities Act to review a policy decision made by the Commission as a whole.

Furthermore, the panel held that the IFBC, as an industry lobby group, was not 'directly affected' or 'affected' by the by-law approval, and therefore lacked standing to bring the application.

The applicants, IPC Securities Corporation, IPC Investment Corporation, and Counsel Group of Funds Inc., applied for exemptive relief from certain provisions of National Instrument 81-105 Mutual Fund Sales Practices.

Specifically, they sought an exemption from the prohibition against paying commission rebates to clients switching to related funds, and an exemption from the requirement to provide specific disclosure about equity interests held by representatives.

The Ontario Securities Commission granted the requested relief, subject to conditions ensuring that commission rebates are not conditional on purchasing related funds and that appropriate evergreen disclosure of equity interests is provided to clients.

The respondents brought a motion to exclude computer forensics evidence and a motion for a non-suit in an insider trading and tipping proceeding.

They argued that the software-generated evidence was unreliable hearsay and that the expert witness was biased and unqualified.

They also argued that Staff failed to establish a prima facie case.

The Commission dismissed the motion to exclude, finding that the software evidence possessed sufficient threshold reliability and that the expert's evidence was admissible, with issues of reliability going to weight.

The Commission also dismissed the non-suit motion, concluding that Staff's circumstantial evidence, taken at its highest, gave rise to reasonable inferences capable of supporting the allegations.

The applicant applied for exemptive relief from the registration and prospectus requirements under the Securities Act to permit the posting of electronic roadshow materials on commercial websites without restriction during the waiting period of a cross-border offering.

Compliance with U.S. SEC rules required unrestricted access, which conflicted with Canadian requirements.

The Ontario Securities Commission granted the relief, subject to the condition that purchasers in Canadian jurisdictions be provided a contractual right of action for any misrepresentations in the roadshow materials.

The applicant, Goodman & Company, Investment Counsel Ltd., applied for exemptive relief from the mutual fund conflict of interest reporting requirements under the Securities Act (Ontario).

The applicant sought relief from the requirement to file monthly reports for portfolio transactions involving related parties, specifically Dundee Securities Corporation.

The Ontario Securities Commission granted the requested relief, subject to the conditions that similar disclosure is made in the management reports on fund performance for each mutual fund and that specific records of related party portfolio transactions are maintained by the mutual funds.

The Filer, Central Sun Mining Inc., applied for a decision that it is no longer a reporting issuer following a business combination with B2Gold.

B2Gold acquired all issued and outstanding common shares of the Filer.

The Filer's securities are beneficially owned by fewer than 15 holders in each jurisdiction and it has no intention to seek public financing.

The Ontario Securities Commission, as principal regulator, granted the requested exemptive relief.

The filers, Newgrowth Corp. and Scotia Capital Inc., applied for an exemption from the Principal Trading Prohibitions under securities legislation.

The exemption would allow Scotia Capital to engage in principal trades of portfolio shares in connection with the public offering of Class B Preferred Shares, Series 2 of Newgrowth Corp. The Ontario Securities Commission, acting as principal regulator, granted the requested exemptive relief.

During a hearing to review a decision of the Toronto Stock Exchange regarding HudBay Minerals Inc.'s proposed acquisition of Lundin Mining Corporation, HudBay and Lundin requested confidentiality orders for certain documents filed in evidence.

The Ontario Securities Commission considered the open court principle and the test for confidentiality under section 9(1) of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act and the Supreme Court's decision in Sierra Club.

The Commission granted confidentiality for documents that were not relevant to its decision on the merits, including handwritten notes and a financial presentation.

However, it ordered that relevant documents, such as special committee minutes and an engagement letter, be made public, subject to minor redactions for third-party sensitive information.