I see that LexisNexis Canada has announced a new court docket service in Canada for dockets at the Federal Court, Federal Court of Appeal and Supreme Court of Canada:

From one intuitive online interface, LexisNexis CaseConnection Dockets enables fast access to key case information for ongoing and new proceedings filed with the Federal Court, Federal Court of Appeal and Supreme Court of Canada. This information helps law firm, government and corporate professionals stay on top of emerging legal issues and cases quickly, cost-effectively and securely.

The press release was not clear on cost of the service, although registration here was . . . [more]

In what is very welcome news, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice has released a practice direction, effective 1 October 2011, authorizing the use of reliable online versions of court decisions for filing in books of authorities and providing for special citation rules:

Practice Direction Regarding Filing of Judicial Decisions from Electronic Databases, and Regarding Citation of All Judicial Decisions

Practice Direction

Judicial Decisions from Electronic Databases

Effective October 1, 2011, copies of judicial decisions obtained from approved electronic databases are acceptable for filing provided the report of the judicial decision contains paragraph numeration consistent with the numbering of

. . . [more]

Those watching Canadian copyright law developments are encountering a busier than usual season.

1. Heritage Minister James Moore hopes to re-introduce Bill C-32 on copyright reform this fall, without amendments, and he is also hoping that the bill is passed by Christmas. This will be the fourth attempt by the Canadian government to amend its copyright laws so that Canada may adhere to the World Intellectual Property Organization digital copyright treaties, and address various digital copyright issues as well as other much discussed copyright issues.
2. The Supreme Court of Canada will simultaneously hear on December 6 and 7 2011, five copyright

. . . [more]

In war, truth is the first casualty.

For those who need to drive home, to their new hires, that litigation is usually not about truth but victory. When and if you read this case, ask yourself why the defence wanted the ruling that Ontario courts did not have jurisdiction. The motion judge accepted the argument. The ONCA reversed.

Dundee Precious Metals Inc. v. Marsland, 2011 ONCA 594 is a conflicts case in which the motion judge’s underlying no jurisdiction conclusion caused the panel to write, laconically,

 [11] The motion judge’s assessment and application of real and substantial connection test

. . . [more]

In the age of social media like Facebook and Twitter, school administrators are asking whether such electronic communication is appropriate between students and teachers. They are wondering where boundaries for such communication should be placed. Many school boards are choosing a strict path, forbidding or restricting any communication via social media between students and teachers.

The Ontario Court of Appeal affirmed the convictions of Garth Drabinsky and Myron Gottlieb but reduced their sentences by a total of two one years, each.

The reasons in R. v. Drabinsky 2011 ONCA 582 were posted on the ONCA website this a.m.

The reasons are “by the Court”. What comes through clearly (at least to me) is that the judges on the panel were not impressed by any aspect of the content of the appeal arguments. I emphasize content, not manner of presentation.

For those who care, I’ve pasted some highlights in the body of the message after the . . . [more]

The European Court of Justice has issued a ruling in Case C‑442/09 Bablok et al v. Freistaat Bayern (Monsanto intervening) that might well cause difficulty for food producers and for Monsanto, the owner of patents to many genetically modified organisms used or sold in the food chain. The plaintiff, a beekeeper, sued the Bavarian state for compensation because pollen from a government owned test field of Monsanto’s GM corn (maize) found its way into his honey, polluting it.

The court agreed that the trace amounts of pollen from the Monsanto corn, even though the pollen was no longer alive or . . . [more]

Justice Secretary Kenneth Clarke announced today that Bills will shortly be introduced in Parliament to overturn prohibitions on cameras in the courtroom.

The media will only be allowed to film judges’ summary remarks only – victims, witnesses, offenders and jurors cannot be filmed.

Filming and broadcasting in court is currently banned under two Acts of Parliament and new legislation will need to be passed to allow cameras into the courts.

The Guardian reports that Clarke had intended to consult with senior judges but in recent days Downing Street had moved to circumvent this consultation process and support the change, whatever . . . [more]

A U.S. court has decided that a bank whose client lost money because someone hacked into its account and transferred funds out of it, was not liable to the client because the bank had used ‘commercially reasonable’ security. The case is described on the Goodwin Proctor website. The lengthy decision of the Judge Magistrate in Patco Construction v People’s Bank, later upheld, is available online. .

Is this the right standard of care for negligence? Does it matter that the bank is regulated strictly under the Bank Act? Does it matter that the U.S. bank could . . . [more]

This past week the Ontario Superior Court released the decision in Baglow v. Smith, where the plaintiff’s claim over an allegedly defamatory blog post was dismissed on summary judgment. The decision is also of interest for Judge Peter Annis’ discussion on how to “remove the sting” of internet postings, and the application of the fair comment defence. Matthew Nied has also posted a more concise summary of the case on his site.

Background

The plaintiff, John Baglow, is relatively renowned in Canadian political circles and operated under the moniker of “Dr. Dawg” on Dawg’s Blog. He describes . . . [more]

There can be many causes of automobile injuries. Fortunately carjacking is not a common cause of injuries in Canada, but when it does happen how should insurance companies treat them? Justice John Murray of the Ontario Superior Court dealt with the issue of an assault while operating an automobile this week by in Downer v. Personal Insurance.

On Feb. 26, 2000, the plaintiff was filling his car with gas at a gas station in Scarborough on a Saturday evening. He was counting his money for payment in his car with his internal lights on when we was approached by . . . [more]

There is an August 22, 2011 decision from the U.S. District Court, Eastern District, in the Matter of Historical Cell-Site Information, 10-MC-897 (NGG), NYLJ 1202511989637 that Slaw readers may find interesting. The U.S. Attorney’s office wanted 113 days of cell phone records from Verizon Wireless. The court said:

While the government’s monitoring of our thoughts may be the archetypical Orwellian intrusion, the government’s surveillance of our movements over a considerable time period through new technologies, such as the collection of cell-site-location records, without the protections of the Fourth Amendment, puts our country far closer to Oceania than our Constitution

. . . [more]