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

For this past month, the three most-consulted English-language decisions were:

1. R. v. Singer, 2026 SCC 8

[1] Thirty years ago, in R. v. Evans, 1996 CanLII 248 (SCC), [1996] 1 S.C.R. 8, this Court affirmed that “the common law has long recognized an implied licence for all members of the public, including police, to approach the door of a residence and . . . [more]

In recent posts, I have been skeptical about using AI to generate certain kinds of legal writing. I’ve drawn a distinction between using AI to edit or revise a document and using it to create one from scratch.

I take the view that even if you can avoid hallucinations, using AI to create a court brief is likely to raise issues of competence. And I’m not convinced it is well suited to drafting opinion or demand letters, because it leads to writing that comes across as flat and robotic, verbose, and overly formalistic.

But there’s another view out there . . . [more]

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is a bold experiment being conducted on our institutions, with very few guardrails. When we do experiments with chemicals and biological materials to develop new drugs, pesticides, or even cleaning products, we set up controlled environments with protections for the humans involved in the testing. AI is mostly being developed without external controls, other than basic guidelines implemented by the developers themselves.

We are living through an experiment and finding out in real time the impact of AI on institutions and society. Sometimes AI is a benefit, sometimes it is benign, and sometimes it can have a . . . [more]

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. Double Aspect 2. Reconciliation Syllabus 3. Civil Resolution Tribunal blog 4. Administrative Law Matters 5. PierreRoy & Associés

Double Aspect
Nothing Matters Still

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.

PÉNAL (DROIT) : La nouvelle preuve que l’appelante, une gardienne d’enfants déclarée coupable de l’homicide involontaire d’un bébé, souhaite introduire n’est pas suffisamment pertinente, plausible et probante quant à la déclaration de culpabilité; un préjudice résultant de l’assistance inadéquate de son avocat en première instance ne peut donc être établi. . . . [more]

As a supplement to our Sunday Summary each month, Supreme Advocacy LLP in Ottawa presents Supreme One-Liners, a super-short descriptive guide to the most recent decisions at the Supreme Court of Canada. Supreme Advocacy LLP offers its more comprehensive weekly electronic newsletter, Supreme Advocacy Letter, summarizing all Appeals, Oral Judgments and Leaves to Appeal granted.

Appeals

Constitutional Law: Right to Vote
Québec (Attorney General) v. Lalande, 2026 SCC 13 (42152)

Québec election statute infringement not justified under s.1.

Constitutional Law: Parliamentary Privilege
Alford v. Canada (Attorney General), 2026 SCC 14 (41336)

Parliament may narrowly limit parliamentary privilege. . . . [more]

Across Canada and beyond, organizations are waking up to a hard truth:
It’s no longer enough to say you value inclusion—your boardroom needs to show it.

For young lawyers and law students just beginning their careers, this call for inclusion is not theoretical, it’s foundational. They’re entering a world where law, leadership, and lived experience increasingly intersect to shape what fair, ethical, and effective governance looks like.

Too often, conversations about equity and diversity stay stuck at the surface, fixating on demographics and checking boxes. But when we look closer, a deeper issue emerges: individuals with different lived experiences often . . . [more]

I recently watched a documentary called Sensitive. The topic of this article was inspired by its content.

Introduction

Have you ever been told that you are too sensitive? Or that you need to have tough skin in this world and especially in the legal profession?

Or, how about the time when you are feeling sad or may start to cry, someone looks at you in a judgmental way and says, “what’s your problem? No one wants a sensitive person to be their lawyer.”

It seems that many of us have shut down our emotions and decided to hide who we . . . [more]

Canadian courts and judges are using AI in their work. Not all of them, but some of them. A small number of courts have publicly announced formal pilots or adoption of AI tools (see, e.g., here and here); other courts have authorized judges to use certain AI tools but haven’t (to my knowledge) made any public announcements about these authorizations; and, finally, individual judges are experimenting with using AI tools in their work on ad hoc, generally undisclosed (at least to the public) bases. I am not aware of any judicial decision in Canada in which a judge has . . . [more]

On March 26, 2026, Bill C-12, the Strengthening Canada’s Immigration System and Borders Act, received Royal Assent. Framed as a response to system pressures and “asylum shopping,” the law marks one of the most significant shifts in Canada’s refugee regime since 2002. Its core effect is simple but profound: it narrows who gets access to a full refugee hearing, and how.

Three changes deserve particular attention.

A One-Year Deadline for Refugee Claims

Canada has replaced a flexible standard requiring claims to be made “without delay” with a strict one-year filing deadline. Claims submitted after that period . . . [more]

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. Stack Condo Law 2. Legal Feeds 3. Vincent Gautrais 4. Rule of Law 5. PierreRoy & Associés

Stack Condo Law
5 Things Condo Managers Must Do When Served With a Claim

No one wants to be handed a claim. Whether it is a slip and fall action, . . . [more]

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.

PÉNAL (DROIT) : La Cour rejette l’appel de la peine de 18 mois d’emprisonnement infligée à l’accusé, lequel a accédé, à partir d’un ordinateur, à des comptes de courrier électronique, Facebook ou iCloud à l’insu d’une vingtaine de personnes titulaires de ceux-ci, accédant ainsi à des renseignements de nature privée, . . . [more]