The law of libel is continually evolving to strike and maintain a careful balance between the protection of reputation and the interests of free expression. This balance was most recently readjusted by the Supreme Court of Canada in its adoption of the new defence of Responsible Communication in Grant v Torstar Corp., 2009 SCC 61. However, proposed legislation in Ontario will have the effect of disrupting this carefully crafted balance, which will ultimately be detrimental to litigants, the right to protect one’s reputation and the overburdened Ontario justice system.

Instead of calling a fall election, the Parti Québécois government has decided, among other things, to devote resources to fighting the federal government over a court challenge to An Act respecting the exercise of the fundamental rights and prerogatives of the Quebec people and the Quebec State (commonly called Bill 99), the provincial law that outlines Quebec's rules for secession from Canada.

On October 17, 2013, Quebec’s Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse released an opinion on the government's policy paper, Orientations gouvernementales en matière d'encadrement des demandes d'accommodement religieux, d'affirmation des valeurs de la société québécoise ainsi que du caractère laïque des institutions de l'État (Charter of Quebec Values) previously discussed on Slaw.

One of the features that I really, really like in the LEGISinfo service is a wee little link in the right panel of the Status Overview for a Bill. The link is titled “Similar Bills Introduced in Previous Sessions”. It is extremely useful to look at previous iterations of legislation and likewise to see how long something has been on Parliament’s agenda. I use this information regularly, most recently for a Slaw post.

Since I was on a plane last week, the title of Bill C-3 which was introduced on Friday caught my eye: “An Act to enact the . . . [more]

Although the Parti Québécois government has yet to table any legislation regarding it's proposed Charter of Quebec Values, and has not provided any firm date as to when it expects to do so, on October 9, 2013, a Québec solidaire member of the national assembly tabled private member's Bill 398, Charter of Quebec State Secularism in the assembly. This Bill conveys that party’s position and tries to provide a compromise to end the contentious debate sparked by the PQ’s proposal.

Yesterday was a horrible day for officers in the Edmonton Police Service Canine Unit. They lost a colleague in the line of duty. Quanto, a decorated Police Service Dog, was killed by a creep allegedly fleeing a stolen vehicle. Note where allegedly and creep are in that sentence.

Today’s Globe and Mail and National Post are reporting that there are calls to change the Criminal Code to allow for stiffer sentencing for killing or injuring a police service animal.

Let me preface what follows with the statement that I love my dog and even some other dogs that are . . . [more]

The Personal Information Protection And Identity Theft Prevention Act (Bill 211) has recently passed in Manitoba and takes effect upon proclamation.

This Private Member’s Bill was most recently introduced on May 28, 2013 but had been put forward a number of times previously. The Explanatory Note sets out that:

This Bill governs the collection, use, disclosure and destruction of personal information by organizations in the private sector. It also establishes a duty for those organizations to notify individuals who may be affected when the personal information the organization has collected is lost, stolen or compromised.

Winnipeg lawyer Brian Bowman, . . . [more]

The Ministry of the Attorney General in Ontario announced today that they will introduce a Bill to change how legal professions are regulated in the province.

The proposed Bill would allow the law society to recover legal costs from discipline proceedings, and will allow information protected by solicitor-client privilege to be used in hearings.

The main thrust of the Bill appears to provide more equitable representation of paralegals within the law society, increasing the number of benchers at Convocation from two to five. The committee chair, who is elected by paralegal members, can attend Convocation but cannot vote unless they . . . [more]

On August 8, 2013, we wrote about Quebec’s New Rules and Procedures for the province’s Immigration and Skilled Workers Program and the significant changes to the program’s selection criteria. As indicated by the Quebec government, "All applications will be processed according to the new rules in effect as of August 1, 2013, with the exception of those for which processing began prior to that date."

Quebec’s ombudsperson—le protecteur du citoyen—offered her support to Bill 52, An Act respecting end-of-life care, in a brief presented to the national assembly’s committee on health and social services. The ombudsperson’s submission to the assembly is important because as its French name indicates, the protecteur du citoyen’s mandate is to protect the rights of citizens or groups of citizens, which includes proposing amendments to existing or draft acts, regulations, directives, and administrative policies in order to improve them for the public good.

Manitoba’s Public Utilities Board (PUB) this week issued a report containing a series of recommendations to the Government of Manitoba on Manitoba’s payday loan regulations and the payday loan industry.

The report is the result of a public review and consultation process undertaken pursuant to the authority given the Board under s. 164 of The Consumer Protection Act and The Public Utilities Board Act.

Payday loans are extremely costly to borrowers. According to the accompanying news release:

A $17 fee on a two-week, $100 loan is equivalent to paying 442% annually as the cost of borrowing.

This seems particularly . . . [more]

Back in April, I posted about a case where the failure of a real estate lawyer to check their fax machine cost their purchaser client a $100,000 deposit. My post is here if anyone is looking for a refresher on the facts.

The purchaser recently appealed the decision to the Court of Appeal who, in a very short decision, upheld Justice Lederman’s decision. . . . [more]