The way governments appoint judges and tribunal members is mostly mysterious – we know the general framework but not the inner workings of the process. It is only when the appointment process fails that we learn of some of the weaknesses in the system. In this column, I want to focus on recent examples of a particularly serious gap in appointment processes – the lack of a robust screening mechanism.

My purpose in highlighting these recent examples is not to suggest that the people appointed did not deserve to be appointed but rather that the government was surprised by information . . . [more]

In June 2025, Yuval Hoah Harari (Note 1) was interviewed by Poppy Harlow at the ‪@WSJNews Leadership Institute on AI and Human Evolution. It is a fascinating discussion and well worth 25 minutes to watch it.

While Harari acknowledges that AI has enormous positive potential he also warns of some dangerous issues affecting many areas of human life.

Highlights of Harari’s insights:

• AI is not just another tool. It is an agent capable of making decisions independently, generating new ideas, and learning without human input. A tool like the printing press cannot write a book by itself and decide

In the May 2025 edition of ADR Perspectives, Marco Abruzzi a med-arbitrator in Victoria, B.C., makes a strong case for Med-Arb as an Effective Mechanism for Resolving Wills & Estates Disputes, concluding,

Med-Arb presents a compelling solution for resolving estate disputes, offering an effective balance between the flexibility of mediation and the finality of arbitration. By increasing the chances that disputes are resolved efficiently, privately, and with minimal damage to family relationships, med-arb is an ideal method for estate conflict resolution. As estate disputes continue to grow in complexity and cost, Med-Arb should be considered as a potential alternative

“If I was having a conversation with someone I disagreed with, in good faith, I would probably start that conversation with what we do agree with.” – Ronny Chieng

The very notion of mandatory mediation is inherently flawed.

A process based foundationally on collaborative self-determination cannot really be forced upon people. There must be buy-in, some desire amongst those experiencing a dispute to work together to sort it out.

While contracts and laws can force mediation on paper, the reality is that the process can practically only come together with willing participants. They can be skeptical – it is not . . . [more]

All of us have seen the consequences of a family in distress. Whether through separation, divorce, or child protection, the family justice system profoundly shapes the lives of children—often without truly hearing them.

Too many young people describe feeling invisible, disempowered, and voiceless in the very processes meant to protect their best interests.

That’s why the Family Justice Innovation Lab (via its Youth Voices Initiative) and the Transform the Family Justice System Collaborative are working to find new approaches—by centring youth with lived experience at the heart of reform.

We are expanding our network of young people who have . . . [more]

Sometimes it’s nice to know you are not alone. A recent survey of international arbitration practitioners shows that Canadian administrative justice practitioners are not the only ones with frustrations about slow and inefficient processes. The survey results are also a strong indicator of the universality of process challenges – these challenges exist in both public and private sector dispute resolution fora and across many (all?) countries.

Every year, White and Case – an international arbitration firm – conducts surveys of international arbitration participants, including in-house counsel of public and private sectors, arbitrators, private practitioners, representatives of arbitral institutions and interest . . . [more]

Mediation has become a cornerstone of Canada’s civil justice system. Whether driven by mandatory programs or chosen voluntarily, it offers parties an efficient, relationship-focused path to resolution. And with the Ontario Civil Rules Review poised to expand its role, mediation’s prominence is only set to grow.

I am still surprised when I am retained as a mediator by counsel who I have never worked with in the past nor even spoken to. While I am happy to have the opportunity, it concerns me and raises a crucial question: how are mediators being selected? Are lawyers choosing mediators based on their . . . [more]

Ten years ago, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission set out some recommendations for cultural competency training for lawyers, law students and public servants. The Calls to Action (numbers 27, 28 and 57) call for education/training on the history of Indigenous peoples, including the history and legacy of residential schools, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, Treaties and Aboriginal rights, Indigenous law, and Aboriginal–Crown relations. The Commission stated that such training would require “skills based training in intercultural competency, conflict resolution, human rights, and anti-racism”.

There were no calls to action for education or training of judges. . . . [more]

As artificial intelligence and digital tools transform nearly every professional field, dispute resolution is no exception. But are these technologies merely enhancing traditional ADR—or are they fundamentally reshaping it?

The widespread adoption of video conferencing, AI-assisted case management, and online negotiation platforms has rapidly moved dispute resolution online. What was once the exception is now the norm. As a result, the boundary between Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) and Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) has become increasingly blurred. But does this distinction still matter? I believe it does—because how we define and design these processes directly affects fairness, access, and the role . . . [more]

It’s hard to keep up with the pace of change/disruption in the United States these days, but much of it is the culmination of a longer trend of an attack on due process rights that is clearly set out in a new book by Professor Brandon L. Garrett – Defending Due Process: Why Fairness Matters in a Polarized World. There are some lessons in this book for Canadians as well.

I talked to Professor Garrett about the origins of the book:

… It used to be that procedural fairness to concepts were central to legal education. … But over

When issues arise in condos, there are benefits to working with those involved to address them. Collaborating offers advantages unavailable through an adversarial path – such as relationship preservation and creative, sustainable outcomes which extend beyond a tribunal’s jurisdiction. The Condominium Authority of Ontario offers an array of online resources to support collaboration, from communication guidance to help identifying issues, to understanding how the law applies to them and more.

The CAO’s Condominium Authority Tribunal further encourages collaboration within its three-staged online process. Once a case is filed, parties experiencing a dispute are invited to address their issue together through . . . [more]

2024 has been a tough year. I don’t know about you, but I needed to end the year with something good to cling to going into 2025. The Advent season spurred a lot of talk about hope, so I looked for things that provided a glimpse of hope for the future of access to justice in BC and beyond. We are tired and need encouragement to keep working.

The good news is that there is much to be hopeful about in the A2J space! Here are some links (Note 1) that crossed my desk in the last month showing recent . . . [more]