“Nicholas has the ability to be firm yet sensible, and will bring practical advice and solutions to the table. He demonstrates strong technical skills and understanding of the law.”

Who's Who Legal

“Nicholas pays extraordinary attention to detail and he has a firm grasp of relevant legal concepts. He is able to advise on complex matters in layman terms and outlines next steps or recommendations in a manner that makes decision making easy.”

Who's Who Legal


Nicholas Reynolds is top-ranked by Leading Global Rankings Agencies and Directories.

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

Rankings + Recognitions


  • 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 | Nov 14, 2023

FamilyMart China Holding Co Ltd v Ting Chuan (Cayman Islands) Holding Corporation: Dividing Disputes Between Arbitration and Court

News + Insights | Nov 6, 2023

Symtech Innovations Ltd. v. Siemens Canada Limited: The Importance of Giving Timely Notice of Claims in Ontario

News + Insights | Oct 31, 2023

Ponce v. Société d’investissements Rhéaume ltée: Good Faith and the Measure of Damages in Québec

News + Insights | Oct 30, 2023

Song Lihua v Lee Chee Hon: The Right to be Heard Requires an Arbitrator’s Full Attention (Don’t Drive While Arbitrating)

News + Insights | Oct 24, 2023

Sjostrom Sheet Metal v Kelson: Transparency and Effective Communication in Non-Fixed Price Construction Contracts

News + Insights | Oct 12, 2023

Sundance Development Corporation v. Islington Chauncery Residences Corp.: The Risks of Accepting an Uncertain “Repudiation” of Contract

News + Insights | Oct 10, 2023

C v D: Compliance with Pre-Arbitration Conditions — A Question of Admissibility Rather than Jurisdiction

News + Insights | Sep 15, 2023

Grupo Unidos Por El del Canal, S.A. et al v. Autoridad del Canal de Panama: Disclosure Obligations and Partiality in Arbitration Revisited

News + Insights | Sep 5, 2023

Sky Power v IrAero: Remote Arbitration Hearings May Create Difficulties for the Parties, But are Unlikely to Cause Prejudice

News + Insights | Jul 31, 2023

Mattamy (Downsview) Limited v. KSV Restructuring Inc. (Urbancorp): Procedural Fairness in Arbitral Proceedings

News + Insights | Jul 28, 2023

Devlan Construction Ltd v SRK Woodworking Inc: Joinder of Trust and Lien Claims is Not Permissible Under Ontario's Construction Act

News + Insights | Jul 17, 2023

Arad Incorporated v Rejali et al: Court Wary of Returning Security in Lien Claims on the Sole Basis of Statutory Adjudication

News + Insights | Jul 14, 2023

CZT v CZU: Deliberative Secrecy in Arbitration

News + Insights | Jun 19, 2023

Bhatnagar v. Cresco Labs Inc.: Clarifying the Duty of Honest Performance and the Presumption of Loss

News + Insights | Jun 13, 2023

Haider v Rizvi: Implications of Failing to Prescribe Form and Content of a Release

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