Professional Background

Nicholas is an Associate in the Construction and Infrastructure Law Group at Singleton Urquhart Reynolds Vogel LLP. Experienced in both traditional litigation and alternative forms of dispute resolution, Nicholas is skilled at resolving complex legal issues.

His practice focuses on resolving challenging disputes for large-scale and international construction projects, including in respect of mass transit, border crossings, and wind farms, as well as healthcare and commercial manufacturing facilities. He is experienced in guiding clients and subject matter experts through the dispute resolution process, and frequently assists in providing advice regarding strategic dispute management. He has also assisted clients with the preparation and negotiation of contract documents for construction projects, including bespoke and standard form contracts.

Nicholas has been recognized by the Alternative Dispute Resolution Institute of Canada (ADRIC) as a Qualified Arbitrator.


  • Called to the Ontario Bar, 2019 
  • Master of Laws., University of Toronto, 2018
  • Juris Doctor, University of Toronto, 2017
  • Master of Arts, University of Toronto, 2017
  • Bachelor of Arts, University of Toronto, 2014


  • Fellow, Chartered Institute of Arbitrators
  • Member, ADR Institute of Canada
  • Member, Canadian Bar Association
  • Member, Ontario Bar Association
  • Member, The Advocates’ Society
  • Member, Toronto Commercial Arbitration Society

Served as part of the legal team representing:

  • An engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) contractor with respect to claims arising out of a $1.3 billion wind energy project in Northern Ontario
  • An owner in relation to a multi-billion dollar cross-border transportation infrastructure project.
  • A joint venture in relation to a $100 million contract for the construction of a public market building.
  • A surety bonding company in relation to multiple performance bond and labour and material payment bond claims arising out of a transportation infrastructure project in Ontario.
  • A municipality in Ontario in relation to claims arising out of the design and construction of a light rail project.
  • A general contractor with respect to claims arising from the renovation of an existing healthcare facility in Ontario.
  • A Crown agency in relation to claims arising out of the design and construction of multiple light rail projects.
  • A general contractor specializing in affordable housing, with respect to a $60 million municipal housing project.
  • A specialty drilling subcontractor with respect to the construction of a highway overpass and associated infrastructure.
  • A general contractor with respect to the design and construction of a $100 million long-term care facility.


News + Insights | May 30, 2023

Kingsgate Property Ltd. v. Vancouver School District No. 39: Issue Estoppel and Prior Arbitrations under the Same Agreement

News + Insights | May 29, 2023

The Estate of Arbabbahrami v. MSH International (Canada) Ltd.: Implications for “War” and “Military or Usurped Power” Insurance Exclusions and Force Majeure Clauses

News + Insights | May 23, 2023

Husky Food Importers & Distributors Ltd v. JH Whittaker & Sons Limited: Ontario’s New Test for Staying Litigation in Favour of Arbitration to Determine the Validity of an Arbitration Agreement

News + Insights | Apr 24, 2023

Limits on the Presumption of Consistent Expression in Contracts: Baffinland Iron Mines v. Tower-EBC

News + Insights | Apr 11, 2023

Judicial Support for Expert Determination as a Dispute Resolution Alternative: KHM Cardiology Centres v Lambardar

News + Insights | Mar 24, 2023

Aroma Franchise Company v Aroma Espresso: Guidance and Questions on Disclosure Obligations and Reasonable Apprehension of Bias in Arbitration

News + Insights | Nov 13, 2022

Peace River v Petrowest: Lessons Learned for the Construction & Infrastructure Industry

Publications | Jul 16, 2021

Singleton Reynolds Contributes Construction and Arbitration Chapters to Lexology’s Global Getting the Deal Through Series

Articles | May 17, 2021

Carillion, the Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act and Construction Lien Act Trusts: Confusion (again) regarding certainty of subject matter and commingling of funds

Articles | Mar 10, 2021

Wastech v Greater Vancouver Sewerage: Uncertainty Remains

Articles | Dec 21, 2020

Callow v Zollinger: Developments in the Duty of Honest Performance and Good Faith’s Uncertain Future

Articles | Oct 7, 2020

The Anti-Deprivation Rule and its Implications for Construction Contracts: Chandos Construction v Deloitte

Publications | Aug 4, 2020

Atlantic Lottery Corp v Babstock: Waiver of Tort Steps Out of the 17th Century, but Uncertainty Persists

Articles | Jul 6, 2020

Uber v Heller – The Evolution of Unconscionability

News + Insights | Apr 10, 2020

Construction Act to be Exempt from Suspension of Procedural Time Limits

Articles | Mar 18, 2020

COVID-19 - Health and Safety Implications

Articles | Nov 5, 2019

Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District v. Wastech Services Ltd: Good Faith and the Exercise of Contractual Discretion

Articles | Oct 31, 2019

CM Callow Inc. v. Zollinger: The Relevance of Good Faith in Terminating Construction Contracts