Canada’s online legal magazine.

A Tale About Rehiring a Sexual Harasser: Who Wins and Loses?

Today’s “#metoo” climate and questions about when someone who has been accused of sexual misconduct, although not convicted of it, should be allowed back into the public sphere (to direct films, do comedy routines, assume an executive role in business or whatever) has been much in the media recently. Although not explicitly, a recent decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal tells us that even if the impact of someone’s return might have significant impact on a victim’s working — and broader — life, return may occur. The final result in Colistro v. Tbaytel 2019 ONCA 197 is not unlike . . . [more] “A Tale About Rehiring a Sexual Harasser: Who Wins and Loses?”

Posted in: Case Comment, Justice Issues

Tips Tuesday

Here are excerpts from the most recent tips on SlawTips, the site that each week offers up useful advice, short and to the point, on practice, research, writing and technology.

Research & Writing

Plain-Language Info on Canadian Copyright Law
Lesley Ellen Harris

Do you sometimes feel that there’s too much information out there? Do you wish there were a list of the top 5 to 10 online articles you need to read to get from point A to point B? These posts on Canadian copyright law provide a basic understanding of a variety of topics. …


Screenshot Entire . . . [more] “Tips Tuesday”

Posted in: Tips Tuesday

CUSMA/USMCA: The Poison Pills Revisited – a Scorecard

On November 30th, 2018, 16 months after the start of negotiations, the leaders of Canada, Mexico and the United States signed the Canada United States-Mexico-Agreement (“CUSMA”) or the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (“USMCA”)[1]. Signed on the margins of the G-20 Summit in Buenos Aires, the agreement is made up of 34 chapters and a dozen side letters. Ironically, it does not include the word “trade” in its title.


In our previous article we addressed the continuing uncertainty that has been a central theme in the tough and sometimes divisive negotiations. The U.S. . . . [more] “CUSMA/USMCA: The Poison Pills Revisited – a Scorecard”

Posted in: Administrative Law

Monday’s Mix

Each Monday we present brief excerpts of recent posts from five of Canada’s award­-winning legal blogs chosen at random* from more than 80 recent Clawbie winners. In this way we hope to promote their work, with their permission, to as wide an audience as possible.

This week the randomly selected blogs are 1. Lash Condo Law 2. Employment & Human Rights Law in Canada 3. SOQUIJ | Le Blogue 4. IP Osgoode 5. Timely Disclosure

Lash Condo Law
Condo Corporation Not Responsible for Parking Garage Vandalism – A Recent Case

In a recent case, Friedich v. MTCC No. 1018,

. . . [more] “Monday’s Mix”
Posted in: Monday’s Mix

No Tort of Harassment for You!

The common law in Ontario has proven relatively adept at developing new torts, in particular in the area of privacy law, to change and adapt to relatively stagnant or unsatisfactory statutory developments.

Although the tort of intimidation has long been recognized as giving rise to a cause of action, as affirmed in cases such as Tran v. University of Western Ontario, the status of the tort of harassment has been much more divided.

The Supreme Court of Canada affirmed in the 1981 decision of Seneca College of Applied Arts and Technology v. Bhadauria that human rights legislation . . . [more] “No Tort of Harassment for You!”

Posted in: Substantive Law: Judicial Decisions

Summaries Sunday: SOQUIJ

Every week we present the summary of a decision handed down by a Québec court provided to us by SOQUIJ and considered to be of interest to our readers throughout Canada. SOQUIJ is attached to the Québec Department of Justice and collects, analyzes, enriches, and disseminates legal information in Québec.

TRANSPORT ET AFFRÈTEMENT : Air Canada a commis une faute contractuelle en exigeant que les personnes handicapées ou obèses qui devaient voyager avec un accompagnateur ou qui nécessitaient un deuxième siège paient des frais supplémentaires pour ce siège additionnel.

Intitulé : P.A. c. Air Canada, 2019 QCCS 606
Juridiction :  . . . [more] “Summaries Sunday: SOQUIJ”

Posted in: Summaries Sunday

Friday Roundup: Slaw Jobs

Each Friday, we share the latest job listings from Slaw Jobs, which features employment opportunities from across the country. Find out more about these positions by following the links below, or learn how you can use Slaw Jobs to gain valuable exposure for your job ads, while supporting the great Canadian legal commentary at

Current postings on Slaw Jobs (newest first):

. . . [more] “Friday Roundup: Slaw Jobs”
Posted in: Friday Jobs Roundup

The Ten Laws of Legal Project Management

Over the next few articles, I’ll introduce the Ten Laws of (Legal) Project Management and then go into some of them in practical, how-do-I-apply-this detail.

Why ten? It feels like about the right number, a manageable number that sums up basic project management maxims and guidelines. (I hear one of you saying, That’s as high as he can count without taking off his shoes. I know who you are, too.)

1. First Effectiveness, Then Efficiency

Efficiency is doing things right, but effectiveness is doing the right things.

If you’re headed in the wrong direction, marching off course ever more efficiently . . . [more] “The Ten Laws of Legal Project Management”

Posted in: Practice of Law

What Should LSBC’s Futures Task Force and LSO’s Technology Task Force Do?

The Law Society of British Columbia’s E-Brief for January 2019 states that LSBC has established a Futures Task Force:

“… to look at the future of the legal profession and legal regulation in British Columbia. The task force is expected to identify anticipated changes that may improve or disrupt the future market for legal services, consider and evaluate the factors and forces driving those changes, as well as make recommendations to the Benchers regarding the implications and how the Law Society and the legal profession might respond to the anticipated changes. … Send your comments or questions to”

. . . [more] “What Should LSBC’s Futures Task Force and LSO’s Technology Task Force Do?”
Posted in: Practice of Law

Book Review: Abortion Rights: For and Against

Several times each month, we are pleased to republish a recent book review from the Canadian Law Library Review (CLLR). CLLR is the official journal of the Canadian Association of Law Libraries (CALL/ACBD), and its reviews cover both practice-oriented and academic publications related to the law.

Abortion Rights: For and Against. By Kate Greasley & Christopher Kaczor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018. 260 p. Includes a bibliography and index. ISBN: 9781316621851 (paperback) $33.95.

Reviewed by Sally Sax
Legal Studies Librarian
Carleton University Ottawa, ON
In CLLR 43:3

Abortion Rights: For and Against presents a philosophical approach . . . [more] “Book Review: Abortion Rights: For and Against”

Posted in: Book Reviews

New Trademarks Rules Require a Different Approach for Swag

Including promotional items in trademark use descriptions will require a different approach under the new trademark rules. On June 17, 2019, the Trademarks Act and the registration process are changing dramatically. Trademark applications will have to classify the goods and services in the use description according to the international Nice classifications. There are 34 classifications of goods, and 11 classes of services.

Trademark filing fees and trademark renewal fees will be class based. Applications containing more than 2 classes of goods and services, and all renewals, will be more expensive than they are now.

Conventional wisdom was to include promotional . . . [more] “New Trademarks Rules Require a Different Approach for Swag”

Posted in: Substantive Law

Wednesday: What’s Hot on CanLII

Each Wednesday we tell you which three English-language cases and which French-language case have been the most viewed* on CanLII and we give you a small sense of what the cases are about.

For this last week:

1. Bowman v. Martineau, 2019 ONSC 1468

[213] I reject the diminution in value approach for the following reasons. This approach fails to take into account the purpose of damages in a tort claim – to ensure that “the damages awarded to a plaintiff should put him or her in the same position as they would have been in had they not sustained . . . [more] “Wednesday: What’s Hot on CanLII”

Posted in: Wednesday: What's Hot on CanLII