Andrew Evangelista
Principal
Andrew is the Founding Principal of Evangelista, Barristers & Solicitors.
Andrew was called to the Ontario Bar in 1994. He began his litigation career in a mid-sized litigation firm in downtown Toronto. After achieving success as a Partner, Andrew pursued his vision to build a litigation firm that would attract talented litigators who desired challenging litigation and discerning clientele. With this in mind, Andrew founded Evangelista, Barristers & Solicitors in 2001. In the years since its inception, the firm has successfully built a reputation as a leading litigation firm in Ontario.
Andrew's career has involved work on complex litigation. His reputation has allowed him to develop an extensive list of clients, including Financial and Public Institutions. He has authored articles on various legal topics and he has been a guest lecturer for the Ontario Government. Andrew is one of the leading trial lawyers in Ontario.
Andrew recognizes the importance of contributing to the next generation of lawyers and as a result he has served as President of the Osgoode Law School Alumni Association. He has been Chair for the Osgoode Hall Law School Mentor Program and a member of the Board of Directors for Osgoode Hall Law School Alumni Association. He was asked to sit as Toronto Region Advisor for the Civil Justice Reform Project for the Province of Ontario.
Andrew has appeared before all levels of the Ontario Court, various Tribunals and Boards.
(416) 363-7851
AEvangelista@evangelista.ca
Andrew has practiced in various areas of litigation including:
- Civil Litigation - Trials and Appeals
- International Corporate Risk Management
- Banking Litigation
- Insurance Defence Litigation
- Disability Insurance Litigation
- Severe Personal Injury Litigation
- Commercial Litigation and Arbitration
- Class Action Litigation
- Punitive Damages / Bad Faith Litigation
- Insurance Coverage Actions
- Product Liability Litigation
- Administrative Litigation
- Envronmental Litigation
- Municipal Litigation
- Employment Litigation
- Fraud
- Arson
- Human Rights Litigation
- Coverage Opinions
Memberships:
- Law Society of Ontario
- The Canadian Bar Association
- The Ontario Bar Association
- Canadian Defence Lawyers' Association
- The Advocates' Society
- The Metropolitan Toronto Trial Lawyers' Association
- The Defence Research Institute
Lecture / Author Topics:
- Civil Litigation
- Trial Procedure
- Negotiation - ADR
- Marijuana Grow Operations and Organized Crime
- Theft of Power
- Legislative Reform
- Class Action Defence
- Punitive Damages Litigation
- Mediation and Alternative Dispute Resolution
- Energy Law
- Institutional Liability and Risk Management
- Insurance and Liability Issues
- Expert Evidence
- Draft Legislation on behalf of the Electricty Distributors Association
- Lecturer at the Green Tide Summit, hosted by Government of Ontario and the Ontario Police Chiefs Association
Recent Decisions
Daverne v. John Switzer Fuels 2015 ONCA 919 (OCA)
This decision from the Court of Appeal addressed the issue of limitation periods in the context of the insurer's duty to defend. Andrew and Avi Cole succeeded in their appeal with the Court of Appeal finding that the insured's claim for a defence was barred by the policy's one year limitation period. In coming to its decision, the Court of Appeal set out new law on the enforceability of insurance policy limitation periods. Moreover, the Court of Appeal held that an insurer's denial of the duty to defend is a "loss" for the purpose of triggering a limitation period. Finally, the Court of Appeal reiterated the standard of review specific to standard insurance policy interpretation, which it held to be one of correctness. Judges must be correct in their interpretation of insurance policies and their decisions will not be granted deference on appeal.
Papapetrou v. 1054422 Ontario Limited, 2012 ONCA 506, 111 O.R. (3d) 532
This summary judgment appeal has been recorded in the O.R., profiled by The Lawyers Weekly, and subsequently cited by Courts throughout Ontario. Andrew and David Powrie represented the Appellant and the Court of Appeal held that the appeal should be allowed. In its reasons, the Court fashioned new law on the insurer's obligations, the duty to defend, indemnification, and breach of contract in the context of an insurance policy.
