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 sixty 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. Rule of Law  2. SOQUIJ | Le Blogue  3. Michael Geist  4. Labour Pains  5. Thoughtful Legal Management

Rule of Law
Bill 14 – Justice Statutes Amendment Act, 2014, Amending WESA, has Passed and Been Given Royal Assent
Bill 14 , which contains an amendment to section 2 (2) of the Wills, Estates and Succession Act, has passed, and was given Royal Asset on April 9, 2014. Section 2 (2) sets out when people cease to be spouses for the purpose of the Act. You can read about the amendment in my previous post here. . . .

SOQUIJ | Le Blogue
L’inaptitude comme motif d’annulation d’un contrat de vente
Dans un reportage de l’émission La Facture diffusée le 8 avril 2014, on présentait l’histoire d’un homme souffrant de bipolarité qui s’était lancé dans une série d’achats compulsifs dont il demandait l’annulation. Il a même signé des offres d’achat d’immeuble. Peut-il plaider son état psychologique pour faire annuler les transactions ? Voici quelques exemples de décisions portant sur des cas similaires. . . .

Michael Geist
Access Copyright Urges Copyright Board to Ignore Bill C-11’s Expansion of Fair Dealing
As I noted in a post yesterday, Access Copyright has filed its response to the Copyright Board of Canada’s series of questions about fair dealing and education in the tariff proceedings involving Canadian post-secondary institutions. Yesterday’s post focused on how Access Copyright has urged the Copyright Board to ignore the Supreme Court of Canada’s ruling on the relevance of licences to a fair dealing analysis. Today’s post examines the collective’s response to the Copyright Board’s question on the effect of the fair dealing legislative change in Bill C-32/C-11. Access Copyright engages in revisionist history as it seeks to hide its extensive lobbying campaign that warned that the reforms would permit mass copying without compensation. . . .

Labour Pains
BCCA: Refusing to Allow Employee to Work during “Working Notice” is Termination
Has an employee who is ‘walked to the door’ by his employer been fired or has he simply been subjected to a fundamental change in employment? What if the employee was provided with “working notice” before being escorted to the door? Can someone be both: (a) escorted out of the building, told not to return, and announced as having “left the company”; and (b) an employee of that company at the same time? Or are those two positions mutually exclusive? Those were the question the Court of Appeal for British Columbia was asked to answer in the case of Allen v. Ainsworth Lumber Co. Ltd., 2013 BCCA 271 (CanLII). . . .

Thoughtful Legal Management
Learning to Lead from Your Inner Executive
This is another guest post from Beth Flynn at the Ohio State University Leadership Center. All of us have these two parts within – the wise and intentional inner executive and the unconscious inner elephant, which does a good job for us most of the time. The friction between inner executive and inner elephant occurs when they have different ideas about desired behavior. The inner elephant is concerned about its own needs and comforts, and is often stronger than the inner executive. The inner executive can see the bigger picture even if it has not learned how to guide and control the elephant. . . .

*Randomness here is created by and its list randomizing function.

Comments are closed.