or, in this case, British Columbia.

The BCCA decision in Clements (Litigation Guardian of) v Clements 2010 BCCA 581, reversing 2009 BSCS 112, implicitly points to a potential source of public unhappiness with the Canadian legal system, because of Tolofson v. Jensen [1994] 3 S.C.R. 1022, the Constitution Act, 1867′‘s s. 92 provision that property and civil rights are a provincial jurisdiction, and inter-provincial mobility, combine to mean that it’s likely enough that accidents occurring in BC will injure Canadians (and others) who aren’t residents of BC.

Ms. Clements was very badly injured in a motor vehicle accident. . . . [more]

Sienkiewicz v Greif (UK) Ltd [2011] UKSC 10

is necessary reading for all Canadian lawyers and jurists who have anything to do with anything that requires or may require a decision on whether X caused Y . . . [more]

If you have been to Halifax, then you have seen the Citadel. The Halifax Citadel is a rather distinguishing feature of the capital of Nova Scotia, in fact it would be safe to say that the existence of the Citadel was the reason for the creation of the municipality known as Halifax. Technically; however, the citadel does not belong to Halifax, it is federal land, specifically a national historic site. Therein, lies the crux of a long simmering dispute between the Halifax Regional Municipality and the Federal Government that is heading to the SCC.

In short, the municipality feels . . . [more]

Via The Law Librarian Blog, Sarah Glassmeyer has started LISVendor.info, a wiki to collect and share information on the relations, financial and otherwise, between law librarians and legal publishers.

In light of recent developments, this may be a particularly timely resource. Since those events, Harper Collins has launched an attack on libraries in general with its 26-loan limit, and the response has been swift, including a boycott and a draft eBook Users’ Bill of Rights.

The Canadian Association of Research Libraries produced a report on eBooks in academic libraries in 2008 that identified a range . . . [more]

Consider this from the just released R v White  2011 SCC 13 at para. 133 per Binnie J, dissenting (McLachlin CJ and Fish J concurring)

• [133] Yet experience has shown that prosecutors will occasionally put forward as evidence of guilt, post-offence conduct that is essentially equivocal — such as the accused’s strange behaviour when first spoken to by the police or the fact he failed to render assistance to the victim. Even where considered of some slight probative value in relation to an issue in the case, its persuasive value in the hands of a skilled prosecutor may create unfair

“The more that you read, the more things you will know. The more that you learn, the more places you’ll go.” — Dr. Seuss (I Can Read with My Eyes Shut)

Early adopters they are not, but lawyers I have found are keen to learn. But as a group, it’s the drive to action that’s the biggest challenge, particularly if it cuts into billable time or doesn’t have an immediate or positive impact that’s within sight.

I’ve been talking a lot about social media to client firms and larger audiences for a while now and the results bring varying degrees . . . [more]

+ –

It seems simple when you put it that way. Anode, cathode. Positive, negative. Summer, winter. But things get problematic when the concept of positive and negative gets transferred into the English language.

In particular, it’s negation that seems to fox us, and particularly double negation. This is something that lawyers know about. After all, people have been poking fun at us for generations for using such nice expressions as “not inconsiderable” and “not unreasonable” etc., as though we were skilled enough to nail down that impossibly slim sliver of space between “reasonable” and “unreasonable.” I have to say . . . [more]

The Globe and Mail reported today that there’s some dissatisfaction with the way Ontario Court of Appeal Justice David Watt has written a few of his judgments. According to the story by Kirk Makin, “some traditionalists” are upset because the judge has imitated novelists, which, according to some critics, might be okay if you’re Lord Denning judging contract disputes but not where criminal law is concerned.

Makin quotes from a few of Justice Watt’s opinions, including, for example, R. v. Yumnu, 2010 ONCA 637:

[1] Tung Duong and Dung Ton fell out over money owed and product misappropriated

I recently received an email from the University of British Columbia explaining that Access Copyright had proposed to raised the annual fee charged to UBC for “copying material from scholarly journals, textbooks, and other materials” by a factor of three. The university and its students’ bill for 2011 will rise from $650,000 to two million dollars. It was encouraging to see that in its email, UBC stated it was “actively considering a range of options to mitigate the financial burden.” 

I’d like to propose a further option for UBC and other institutions to consider. It draws on a historical principle . . . [more]

Happy Seventy Fifth Birthday to Justice Antonin Scalia, whose recent peevish dissents are discussed in a recent blog post from the NYT.

Had he been north of the border, he would have been packing his bags, just after blowing out the candles.

(2) A Judge of a Superior Court, whether appointed before or after the coming into force of this section, shall cease to hold office upon attaining the age of seventy-five years, or upon the coming into force of this section if at that time he has already attained that age.

The fiasco of everything Charlie Sheen could only properly culminate in a lawsuit.

A breach of contract claim was filed today in Los Angeles by entertainment law firm Lavely & Singer for $100 million against Warner Bros. (WB Studio Enterprises, Inc.) and Hollywood executive producer Chuck Lorre.

A summary of the claim is available at The Globe. . . . [more]

Earlier this week, the Public Commission on Legal Aid in British Columbia released its report on the sad state of legal aid in the province.

Commissioner Leonard T. Doust makes 7 overarching findings:

• The legal aid system is failing needy individuals and families, the justice system, and our communities.
• Legal information is not an adequate substitute for legal assistance and representation.
• Timing of accessing legal aid is key.
• There is a broad consensus concerning the need for innovative, client-focused legal aid services.
• Steps must be taken to meet legal aid needs in rural communities.
• More people should be eligible