Canada’s online legal magazine.

An Election Is Not Equivalent to Public Participation

Ontario’s 2018 election for the 42nd Parliament was something remarkable. It denoted the worst result for any incumbent government party in the province’s history.

The governing party secured this success despite an unexpected leadership race triggered only months before the June election. In part, voters’ motivation appeared to be informed by a need for change.

This overwhelming success by the government has been repeated cited as a “mandate,” to effectively enact almost any policy priority identified by them, even if done so following their election. With a majority government, there has already been widespread legal reforms, though some have been . . . [more]

Posted in: Substantive Law: Judicial Decisions

Summaries Sunday: Supreme Advocacy

One Sunday each month we bring you a summary from Supreme Advocacy LLP of recent decisions at the Supreme Court of Canada. Supreme Advocacy LLP offers a weekly electronic newsletter, Supreme Advocacy Letter, to which you may subscribe. It’s a summary of all appeals as well as leaves to appeal granted so you will know what the SCC will soon be dealing with (September 27 – October 11, 2019 inclusive).

Appeals

Criminal Law: Arrest
Fleming v. Ontario2019 SCC 45 (38087)

Where the exercise of a police power restricts lawful activities of individuals, courts must apply the test . . . [more]

Posted in: Summaries Sunday

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.

ASSURANCE : La compagnie d’assurances intimée, qui a indemnisé son assurée, ne peut bénéficier d’une répartition de la perte entre elle et la compagnie d’assurances appelante puisque les 2 assurances en cause, bien qu’elles couvrent la même perte, ne sont pas de même niveau.

Intitulé : Compagnie d’assurances générales Co-Operators . . . [more]

Posted in: Summaries Sunday

The Special Lectures – Continuing Legal Education Since 1943

A short history of the origin of the Special Lectures compiled primarily from the prefaces of the first three Special Lectures on their 76th anniversary.

The 2019 Special Lectures – One of the great traditions of the Law Society

The Special Lectures for 2019 have been announced. Once again the Law Society of Ontario will use the Special Lectures to help guide the legal profession through a period of momentous change. The first Special Lectures were held to educate the members of the Bar to deal with the massive changes in the law triggered by the needs of the war . . . [more]

Posted in: Legal Publishing

Friday Jobs Roundup

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 Slaw.ca.

Current postings on Slaw Jobs (newest first):

. . . [more]
Posted in: Friday Jobs Roundup

Refusing Dangerous Work Is Not Only in the Eye of the Beholder

Written by Daniel Standing LL.B., Editor, First Reference Inc.

Hassan v City of Ottawa (OC Transpo), 2019 OHSTC 8 confirms the principle that an employee’s belief in a work-related threat that is purely subjective and hypothetical will not allow the employee to invoke the exceptional remedy under the Canada Labour Code to refuse to work.

To legitimately refuse to work on this basis, the employee’s perception of danger must also be objectively reasonable. In this case, the employee’s refusal failed to meet that threshold.

Key facts

The employee was a bus driver working for the City of Ottawa (OC . . . [more]

Posted in: Case Comment, Practice of Law: Practice Management, Substantive Law, Substantive Law: Judicial Decisions

Thursday Thinkpiece: LGBTQ2+ Law Practice Issues and Analysis

Periodically on Thursdays, we present a significant excerpt, usually from a recently published book or journal article. In every case the proper permissions have been obtained. If you are a publisher who would like to participate in this feature, please let us know via the site’s contact form.

LGBTQ2+ Law: Practice Issues and Analysis

General Editor: Joanna Radbord
Foreword: Kathleen Wynne

ISBN: 978-1-77255-432-8
Publisher: Emond Publishing
Page Count: 640
Publication Date: October, 2019

Regular Price: $136 (print), $116 (e-book).
Until the end of October, orders of this title will receive a 15% pre-publication discount, plus free shipping.

Excerpt: from . . . [more]

Posted in: Thursday Thinkpiece

Book Review: Social Media and Morality–Losing Our Self Control

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.

Social Media and Morality: Losing Our Self Control. By Lisa S. Nelson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018. 225 p. Includes bibliographic references and index. ISBN 9781107164932 (hardcover) $114.95. ISBN 9781316616574 (softcover) $39.95.

Reviewed by Sally Sax
Collections Librarian (Business, Public Affairs, Legal Studies)
Carleton University
In CLLR 44:2

Social Media . . . [more]

Posted in: Book Reviews

Developing Privacy Best Practices for Direct-to-Public Legal Apps: Observations and Lessons Learned

What privacy issues arise when legal apps are used by the public? What are current best practices for safeguarding privacy interests when developing legal apps? What do developers think? What challenges arise in developing privacy best practices for legal apps?

Along with my colleagues Suzanne Bouclin, Jena McGill and Teresa Scassa, I recently completed a project that tried to answer these questions. A pre-print version of the peer-reviewed article that discusses this project at length can be found here. This column will provide highlights of the discussion contained in that article.

Background

We were inspired to develop privacy best . . . [more]

Posted in: Legal Ethics

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. Dunsmuir v. New Brunswick2008 SCC 9

[1] This appeal calls on the Court to consider, once again, the troubling question of the approach to be taken in judicial review of decisions of administrative tribunals. The recent history of judicial review in Canada has been marked by ebbs and flows of deference, confounding tests and new words for old problems, but . . . [more]

Posted in: Wednesday: What's Hot on CanLII

Theory and Practice: The Four Defining Pillars of Ryerson’s Faculty of Law

The Ryerson Faculty of Law is built on four pillars – a commitment to equity, diversity and inclusion, increasing access to justice, stimulating innovation and entrepreneurship, and providing sound academics with innovation pedagogy.

Ryerson’s proposal was shaped by widespread consultations within the university and in the broader legal community. This included continuous community engagement, solid academic input and feedback, stakeholder engagement, engagement with organizations representing lawyers from diverse backgrounds, and a comprehensive external review of the draft proposal.

In creating and refining a proposal for legal education at Ryerson, two separate internal committees were established. The first was a cross-campus . . . [more]

Posted in: Legal Education

College of Midwives of BC v. MaryMoon

On my way to writing a post applying the UK Supreme Court’s decision on the Boris Johnson prorogation to the City of Toronto decision upholding the province’s reduction of wards, I decided to take a detour to examine the College of Midwives of British Columbia v. MaryMoon in which Madam Justice Sharma held that section 12.1(1) of the BC Health Professions Act (HPA) is unconstitutional because it contravenes section 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms without justification. . . . [more]

Posted in: Case Comment, Substantive Law: Judicial Decisions