Canada’s online legal magazine.

Archive for November, 2023

Two WSIA Actions Dismissed With Many Lessons Learned

Christina Catenacci, BA, LLB, LLM, PhD, Content Editor, First Reference Inc.

The Ontario Superior Court of Justice just dismissed two actions regarding claims under the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act. The Court confirmed the decision of the Vice-Chair of the Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal, and similarly concluded that D lost her right of action under the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act. Additionally, D’s family member also lost her right of action under the Family Law Act, as this claim was derivative in nature and dependent on D’s claim. The Court made a strong comment about . . . [more]

Posted in: Case Comment, Substantive Law, Substantive Law: Judicial Decisions

Everybody Hates the McGill Guide: A Citations Editor’s Lamentation

Contrary to popular belief (i.e., that of my closest friends and family), a lot of people care about the McGill Guide. This is evidenced by the many tweets, blog posts, and articles that refer to the Guide. As the Citations Editor of the 10th edition, I’ve read all of them. While I found many to be insightful and helped me through the course of my mandate, I noticed something: few seemed to understand the actual process behind writing the McGill Guide. This article aims to fill this conceptual void by providing a firsthand account of how the 10th edition was . . . [more]

Posted in: Legal Information

5 Ways Lawyers Can Stop Avoiding Conflict

“You’re a lawyer — you must like arguing!” While this may be true for some lawyers, when it comes to conflict with their closest colleagues, many would rather avoid the pain and discomfort.

Although interpersonal conflict is often thought of as a battle between two people, I have learned that conflict is about tension between people when they differ in beliefs, behaviours, opinions, or values.

Some lawyers will approach the issue with colleagues, senior lawyers, and partners head-on and in doing so deliver what the other person feels as a gut-wrenching blow. Other lawyers are more passive; they either avoid . . . [more]

Posted in: Practice of 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. Administrative Law Matters 2. Le Blogue du CRL 3. Legal Feeds 4. The Court 5. Canadian Combat Sports Law Blog

Administrative Law Matters
Against ATCO: Text, Purpose & Context, not “Implied” and “Express” Powers

I have a new paper coming out next year in the Advocates’ Quarterly

. . . [more]
Posted in: Monday’s Mix

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.

PÉNAL (DROIT) : Puisque chacun des poursuivants sous l’autorité du Directeur des poursuites criminelles et pénales (DPCP) est un substitut légitime du procureur général, l’article 7 (4.3) C.Cr. n’impose pas au DPCP de consentir personnellement et expressément aux procédures engagées relatives à des infractions sexuelles contre des enfants commises à . . . [more]

Posted in: Summaries Sunday

Business Justifications Shield Employer in Reprisal Complaint

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

Under Ontario’s occupational health and safety legislation’s reprisal provisions, the employer in 2023 CanLII 73671 was able to show that its actions weren’t motivated by any ill-will toward the employee for filing a harassment complaint against her manager. The case offers a reminder to employers of the value of maintaining evidence that can show a chronology of key events. What on its face may appear to be nefarious retaliation may actually be the outcome of a planned organizational decision that was made for a valid business reason. . . . [more]

Posted in: Case Comment, Substantive Law, Substantive Law: Judicial Decisions

Tribunals: A “People-Centered” Framework

As Noel Semple, wrote earlier this year here on Slaw, each year, over 100,000 Ontarians seek justice from Tribunals Ontario which, as he points out, is far more people than will start civil lawsuits in the Superior Court of Justice each year.

In Ontario, adjudicative tribunals have jurisdiction over matters ranging from housing and tenancy disputes to employment law matters, social benefits disputes, and other types of legal matters, so when we talk about everyday legal problems – increasingly captured in legal needs surveys such as the recent Statistics Canada Legal Needs Survey and the CFCJ’s Cost of Justice Project . . . [more]

Posted in: Justice Issues

The Problem With Associate Fee Splits

Compensation is a reflection of value, but also has the purpose of motivating workers. Where compensation is a fee split, make sure that your offer is accomplishing both of these objectives.

I work predominantly with small to medium-sized law firms in Canada, so my comments here reflect that particular marketplace. And within that market, over the past five years, it has become increasingly common for law firms to compensate Associates through a fee split: paying the Associates with a percentage of their collected revenue instead of a salary. This appears to have started due to the challenge in finding and . . . [more]

Posted in: Practice of Law

Canada’s Supply Management System Part v – New Zealand’s Trade Challenge

In our July 2022 update on the Canada- U.S. Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) dispute over Canada’s supply management system for dairy products,[1] we referred to “new front” in the “dairy wars.“ New Zealand launched a complaint against Canada pursuant to the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP),[i] taking issue with its lack of “promised access” to its otherwise restricted dairy market.[ii]

New Zealand considers the manner in which Canada is implementing its dairy TRQs to be inconsistent with its obligations under CPTPP. …. New Zealand exporters … are not able to fully benefit from the market access that

. . . [more]
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. Eloise Gratton 2. ReconciliAction YEG 3. The Trauma-Informed Lawyer 4. Legal Feeds 5. Canadian Class Actions Monitor

Eloise Gratton
BLG recrute avocat.e.s en protection de la vie privée et droit des technologies!

BLG offre à ses clients des conseils stratégiques et juridiques dans le domaine du droit

. . . [more]
Posted in: Monday’s Mix

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.

CONSTITUTIONNEL (DROIT) : En matière de violation de droits ancestraux, la Cour supérieure ne se sent plus liée par le test qu’a établi il y a plus de 30 ans la Cour suprême du Canada dans R. c. Van der Peet (C.S. Can., 1996-08-21), SOQUIJ AZ-96111094, J.E. 96-1675, [1996] 2 . . . [more]

Posted in: Summaries Sunday

Last-Best Offer Arbitration in Family Law Disputes

One of the most significant advantages arbitration offers over litigation is the ability to design a bespoke dispute resolution process tailored to the circumstances of the particular case, offering no more bells and whistles than those which are absolutely necessary for the arbitrator to fairly resolve the legal issues. Not only can participants decide what level of disclosure must be met, whether evidence is required and how any evidence will be presented, and whether time limits on oral evidence and arguments and page limits on affidavits will be helpful, they can also decide whether the arbitrator will resolve their dispute . . . [more]

Posted in: Practice of Law