As 2025 draws to a close, this column looks back on three high-profile areas of development in Canadian legal ethics and lawyer regulation over the past year. It also flags several major court cases and disciplinary proceedings from 2025, as well as cases to watch for in the year ahead.

Three High-Profile Areas of Development

1. Rule of Law Concerns

The first year of Donald Trump’s second presidential term sent shock waves through the American justice system. In the spring, it was reported that U.S. federal judges were experiencing “unusually high threat levels” amid often vicious partisan attacks. Some began . . . [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.

FISCALITÉ : Le juge de première instance n’a pas commis d’erreur révisable ni exercé son pouvoir discrétionnaire de manière déraisonnable en rejetant sommairement la contestation fiscale de l’appelant après l’avoir déclarée abusive; la question en litige a été tranchée de manière définitive par la Cour d’appel fédérale.

Intitulé : Clément . . . [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

Criminal Law: Arrest
R. v. Carignan, 2025 SCC 43 (41186)

Clarifications re s.495 and arrest without warrant.

Oral Judgment

Criminal Law: Sexual Exploitation
R. v. D.,2025 SCC 42 (41754)

Sexual exploitation appeal allowed. . . . [more]

Justice Hamilton (BC SC) recently issued a scathing decision against an unauthorized immigration representative, including a judgment that included more than $80k USD in damages. This decision may become a powerful precedent for other victims of ghost representatives to obtain financial compensation and damages. In my office, we have seen an increase in public interest in pursuing litigation against fraudulent misrepresentation and negligence. I do not practice litigation so I refer these individuals to competent counsel. Justice Hamilton’s decision represents a small step in the right direction and underscores how difficult it can be to hold scammers to account. . . . [more]

In just a few weeks, the Legal Design Journal (the LD Journal)[1] will launch its second edition. Published online and free via open source, the journal is gaining in popularity and success since its maiden voyage in June of 2025.

Unlike some open-access academic journals, the LD Journal does not charge its authors publication fees or its readers a viewing/downloading fee – it is known as “diamond open-access”.

The LD Journal is the first of its kind. An academic journal that connects academics and practitioners of legal design by combining three separate elements: articles, a studio showcase, and . . . [more]

If you’ve been adrift on the internet desperately trying not to drown in the flood of legal information, great news! You’ve found a raft!

No, that’s not really funny. When you’re representing yourself, trying to get to the information you want does often feel like drowning. There’s so much info, mostly not what you need, so you wind up flailing about desperate to stay afloat while the currents try to pull you under. Or you get caught in whirlpools of misinformation. Or weighted down by too much case law.

Few make an intentional choice to dive in and go DIY-lawyering. . . . [more]

INTRODUCTION

The relationship between “hate expression” and religion and religious belief in Canada has always been a tangled one: the source of hatred can be grounded in religious belief and hatred can be directed against individuals or a group on the basis of their religion.

The current hate provisions in the Criminal Code of Canada (“the Code”) acknowledge this dual role of religion in both its offences and defences. The proposed amendments to the Code, Bill C-69, the Combatting Hate Act, add offences and defences that bear a distinct resemblance to activities that have occurred across Canada since Hamas’s . . . [more]

When starting a PhD thesis or other long piece of writing (any substantial intellectual project really), choosing the right topic is a significant part of whether the end result will be successful. Graduate students choose their topics in many ways. Some see postings for PhD positions within research groups and apply to work on a project with a particular researcher. Some may start a degree program and decide on a topic after they’ve spent time with the subject. And some have a passion for a particular topic and want to spend several years working deeply on it to move the . . . [more]

In a bizarre procedural twist, the Ontario Divisional Court issued two contradictory decisions on consecutive days in the same case. Two written motions for leave to intervene in Dosu v. Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario was sent to two different judges – Justice Sharon Shore and Justice Shaun Nakatsuru – who rendered opposite rulings. Justice Shore dismissed the would-be intervenors; the next day, in a separate ruling, Justice Nakatsuru granted them intervention, setting the stage for what appears to be an embarrassing judicial outcome for the court.

The anomaly in the motions outcome – essentially a legal coin flip yielding . . . [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) : Si, après avoir fait le constat de la possibilité que l’accusé n’ait jamais dormi chez sa nièce durant les années 1970, la juge de première instance s’était employée à démêler adéquatement la preuve, elle n’aurait pu raisonnablement conclure que le problème de fiabilité était limité à la . . . [more]