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]

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]

In September, 2025, the Commonwealth formally adopted theCommonwealth Model Law on Digital Trade. It replaces the Model Law on Electronic Transactions from 2002.

The 2002 Model Law essentially provided a consistent method for Commonwealth states to implement the UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce(MLEC)(1996). The MLEC has now been adopted in over 100 jurisdictions worldwide and underpins the global legal use of e-communications.

All Canadian jurisdictions have had a version of the MLEC since the early 2000s, all but Quebec through adoption of the Uniform Electronic Commerce Act created by the Uniform Law Conference of Canada in . . . [more]

Abstract

Authored By: Professor Wissam Aoun, Associate Professor & Member of Windsor Law LTEC Lab and Caitlyn Massad, JD Candidate at Windsor Law

1. INTRODUCTION Pharmascience Inc. v. Janssen Inc.[1] is scheduled to be heard by the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) this coming October. In Pharmascience, the SCC will revisit the decades old prohibition against patenting of methods of medical treatment. The case revolves around a fact pattern common to several recent ‘skinny label’ cases.

URL
https://www.lteclab.com/post/physicians-as-infringers-putting-pharmascience-into-persepective . . . [more]

As the April federal election approaches, an issue that has receded from the public consciousness is the significant loss of social legislation upon the prorogation of Parliament that preceded the Liberal Leadership Convention. Such pauses are commonplace, but in this instance, it drew widespread criticism across strata of society due to the threat of unprovoked economic warfare from the Trump administration and the number of government bills that died on the order paper.

The Public Service Alliance of Canada, for example, criticized the government for failing to pass the pension fairness measures and tax breaks promised in the 2024 . . . [more]

INTRODUCTION

The Supreme Court of Canada (“the SCC”) has granted leave to appeal English Montreal School Board, et al. v. Attorney General of Quebec, et al., in which the English Montreal School Board and others are challenging Quebec Bill 21, Act respecting the laicity of the State (“Bill 21”). In enacting Bill 21, the Quebec government invoked 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (“the Charter”) (“the notwithstanding clause” or “the override”), as well as the section 52 override in the province’s human rights statute, the Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms. Here I . . . [more]

INTRODUCTION

In the midst of writing this post yesterday, January 6th, I thought back to that day in 2021 when Donald Trump attempted a coup in the United States to seize the presidency despite having lost the 2020 election. This year’s certification of the 2024 election involved no such threat to democracy only because Trump won the election. But it may be because I have the concept of “coup” on my mind that I am tempted to describe West Whitby Landowners Group Inc. v. Elexicon Energy Inc. (Ont. CA) (“West Whitby”) as a “judicial coup”, albeit a coup somewhat more . . . [more]

Written by Christina-Catenacci, BA, LL.B., LLM, PhD Editor, First Reference Inc.

In August 2024, a New Brunswick labour arbitrator denied the union’s grievance that argued that an employee should have been awarded a job. The union took issue with the employer’s job requirement to have 1,000 hours of experience and stated that it was unreasonable. The arbitrator agreed with the employer that the employer was allowed to stipulate that job applicants for the position of truck driver had 1,000 hours of experience. . . . [more]

The recent changes to the Family Law Act dealing with pets in the context of family law disputes received a lot of attention and were widely celebrated. However, they didn’t do much to alter the fundamental treatment of pets as chattel. This article provides a brief digest and analysis of those amendments.

On 15 January 2024, the portions of British Columbia’s Family Law Act dealing with the division of property were amended to address pets, the idea being that people have important emotional relationships with pets and post-separation conflict might be reduced if clear guidelines were provided. Prior to these . . . [more]

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

This case reads like a cautionary tale for employers. In 2024 O.H.R.T.D. No. 862, the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal exposed the danger of adopting an inflexible approach to an employee’s challenging caregiving role at home. In the end, significant damages were awarded for the failure to accommodate and for reprisal. Other employers can avoid the same fate by understanding the rights and obligations at play in this context. . . . [more]

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

It’s a basic principle that a party needs to know the case being alleged against it to fairly respond to it. The Ontario Superior Court of Justice rendered a decision in 2024 ONSC 2948 where an employment relationship went bad, resulting in a lawsuit. The employer cried foul over the information it received in response to its demand for particulars and brought a motion asking the court to order them. The court disagreed, shedding light on the extent of information a respondent is entitled to receive before examination for discovery. . . . [more]

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

The Alberta grievance arbitration decision in 2024 CanLII 38826 (AB GAA) draws a distinction between contracting out and contracting in. The grievance concerned a company’s decision to fill its Tank Farm Project Operator position at its refinery, involving issuing permits for project work, isolations, expansions and tank cleaning. The position typically was filled by a bargaining unit member to promote individual development within the unit. . . . [more]