Tamara Ramsey

P: 416.644.9975
F: 416.368.0300
Tamara is a litigator. She has a general litigation practice that focuses on corporate and commercial matters, which includes contractual issues, shareholder disputes, estate disputes, complex torts, and termination of employment, consulting and partnership relationships. Tamara also has experience with disputes involving patent, trade-mark, copyright, technology, telecommunications, and licensing issues.

Tamara regularly appears before judges and masters of the Ontario Superior Court as well as the Toronto Commercial List, Ontario Court of Appeal and Federal Courts. Tamara also has extensive experience as counsel in disputes that proceed by way of arbitration.

Prior to joining Chitiz Pathak LLP, Tamara practiced as an associate at McCarthy Tétrault LLP and worked as a technical writer and systems analyst.

Tamara was called to the Bar in March 2003. Tamara received her LL.B. from Osgoode Hall Law School, a Bachelor of Arts (Honours) from the University of Winnipeg and a Masters of Arts from Wilfrid Laurier University (with Distinction). She was the recipient of the Wilfrid Laurier Graduate Gold Medal in Arts and several other awards for academic achievement.

Tamara is a member of the Advocates Society, Ontario Bar Association, and Intellectual Property Institute of Canada (IPIC) where she is a member of the Litigation Committee. She has been invited to speak at CLE events hosted by the Ontario Bar Association. She volunteers with the charity, Second Harvest, and is a member of the steering committee for its annual Toronto Taste event.

Some notable reported decisions in which Tamara appeared as counsel include:

  • Sadhu Singh Hamdard Trust v. Navsun Holdings Ltd., 2014 FC 1139 in which the Court dismissed claims for passing off and copyright infringement by an Indian newspaper against a Canadian newspaper.

  • Kastner v. Davis, 2012 ONSC 2100 and 2012 ONSC 3006 (costs) in which Chitiz Pathak’s client defeated a motion for summary judgment in a matter involving breaches of a fiduciary duty by her client’s former lawyer and boyfriend and received a sizable cost award.

  • Combined Air Mechanical Services Inc. v. Flesch, 2011 ONCA 764 in which the Court of Appeal upheld the granting of a motion for summary judgment and set out the new test for summary judgment and the use of a judge’s expanded powers to make findings and hear evidence.

  • Moore v. Moore, 2011 ONSC 6728 in which Tamara obtained leave to appeal a decision allowing amendments made to a statement of claim after the expiry of the limitation period.

  • Combined Air Mechanical Services Inc. v. Flesch, 2010 ONSC 400 in which Tamara successfully argued that certain proposed amendments were barred by the applicable limitation period and received an award for costs thrown away as the result of certain allegations being withdrawn.

  • Crystalline Data Structures Inc. v. Brainhunter (Ottawa) Inc. (2009, unreported) in which Tamara acted as one of two lawyers at the trial who obtained a sizable judgment for Chitiz Pathak’s client. The case involved novel issues regarding the enforceability of a share purchase agreement where the parties consented to delay the formal closing but nevertheless operated pursuant to an interim arrangement until the plaintiff withdrew from that interim arrangement and share purchase transaction. The plaintiff sued for monies paid to the defendant during the interim period and the defendant counterclaimed for its losses caused by the plaintiff’s repudiation.

  • Saltzman Family Holdings Limited v. Duncan-Cosburn, 2007 CanLII 54977 (ON SC) in which Tamara succeeded at a summary trial to obtain judgment against tenants who had abandoned the premises part way through the term of a commercial lease despite the numerous defences that were pleaded and pursued by the defendants.

  • Moritex Europe Ltd. v. Oz Optics Ltd., 2006 CanLII 19442 (ON SCDC) in which the Divisional Court dismissed the respondent’s appeal of a motion granting summary judgment in a case involving arguments under the Sale of Goods Act. The Divisional Court also clarified the standard of review on appeals from decisions of masters.

  • Marks & Clerk v. Sparkles Photo Ltd, 2005 FC 1012 in which Tamara successfully resisted an appeal of the registrar’s decision in a section 45 summary expungement proceeding upholding the registration of her client’s trade-mark despite a deviation in use.

  • Apotex Inc. v. Merck & Co. Inc., 2004 FC 1452 in which the Court dismissed a motion to strike part of a statement of defence alleging patent infringement in defence to a claim for damages under section 8 of the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations.

Practice Areas

  • Commercial Disputes
  • Shareholder Remedies
  • Estate Litigation
  • Complex Tort Claims
  • Professional Negligence
  • Arbitration and Mediation
  • Employment Disputes
  • Trade-mark Disputes