After much stalling and anticipation Ontario has finally enacted a formal ignition interlock program designed to relieve some of the burden on our courts caused by massive amounts of impaired driving litigation.

Effective Aug. 3, 2010, persons convicted of a first impaired driving offence that does not cause bodily harm or death will be eligible for reduced licence suspensions if they comply with the regulations of the program — the primary requirement being the installation of an ignition interlock device (essentially a mini-breathalyzer machine attached to the ignition of your vehicle making it impossible to operate the car unless sobriety . . . [more]

LEAF lobbies to defeat or amend Bill-C3 on discrimination in the Indian Act

General consultations on Quebec’s Bill 94, An Act to establish guidelines governing accommodation requests within the Administration and certain institutions started on May 18, 2010. Much to my annoyance, many journalists and media outlets are referring to the bill as “the facial covering bill” or “the niqab bill”. To summarize, the bill says...

This week’s issue of The Lawyers Weekly (vol 30., no. 3, May 21/10) has an article on the first page crowing about the successful dismissal, under Quebec legislation, of an action found to be a SLAPP (a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) action. The article continues on p.3 under the caption “Decision will ‘no doubt discourage’ abusive suits and SLAPPs.”

I’m going to put aside (what is to me the obvious) conflict between anti-SLAPP legislation and the “not plain and obvious that the action must fail” threshold which, in substance, is all that is needed on the merits issue for . . . [more]

Between the government’s withdrawal of funding for NGOs that provide maternal health programs overseas, and a proclaimed emphasis on maternal health at the upcoming G8, some in Canada are wondering if we’re heading to a new vote on abortion.

Liberal MP Paul Szabo of Mississauga South said,

Is (a vote) inevitable? I would say yes.

If such a vote was held today, what would the outcome be? . . . [more]

The text of the Eliminating Pardons for Serious Crimes Act, Bill C-23, introduced in the House yesterday, is available here. It amends the Criminal Records Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-47. The official summary of the Bill reads as follows:

This enactment amends the Criminal Records Act to substitute the term “record suspension” for the term “pardon”. It extends the ineligibility periods for applications for a record suspension. It also makes certain offences ineligible for a record suspension and enables the National Parole Board to consider additional factors when deciding whether to order a record suspension.

According . . . [more]

On May 6th, the federal government introduced Bill C-22, the Protecting Children From Online Sexual Exploitation Act. If passed, the Act will impose a duty on persons who provide an “internet service” (internet access, e-mail or internet content hosting) to report child pornography offences in certain circumstances. This includes when a service provider has reasonable grounds to believe its service is being used to commit a child pornography offence. Fines and offences range from $1,000 to $100,000 for repeat offenders.

This adds to duties embodied in legislation in Manitoba (in force since April 2009), Nova Scotia (in force since . . . [more]

It might be time to visit once again the substance and situation of Bill C-232, which received 3rd Reading on March 31 and awaits Royal Assent to become law. The text the legislation is as follows:

1. Section 5 of the Supreme Court Act is renumbered as subsection 5(1) and is amended by adding the following:

(2) In addition, any person referred to in subsection (1) may be appointed a judge who understands French and English without the assistance of an interpreter.

1. L’article 5 de la Loi sur la Cour suprême devient le paragraphe 5(1) et est modifié par

. . . [more]

There is a draft copy of the new Alberta Rules of Court available.

As you learned from Slaw the new Rules of Court are scheduled to come into force on November 1, 2010.

There is this big caveat to be aware of:

Please note: This draft of the new Alberta Rules of Court is provided for information purposes only, and is subject to further revision. The new Alberta Rules of Court have not yet received the final recommendation of the Minister of Justice and Attorney General, nor has the regulation been made by the Lieutenant Governor in Council. Reference

. . . [more]

The City of Toronto is gearing up for its mayoral elections over the next few months, and public transit tops the list for issues of public interest. But one incident on the Toronto subway system has residents worried about safety.

On Apr. 24 at 8:30 p.m., 79-year-old Yusuf Hizel was traveling eastbound on the Bloor-Danforth line when he was assaulted by two individuals who took his wallet. Although the train was full, nobody intervened or attempted to obtain assistance from subway officials. The incident appears to have happened relatively quickly, which may have also limited the ability of other . . . [more]

A Patent Prosecution Highway (“PPH”) program was implemented between the Canadian and US patent offices in 2008 to accelerate patent examination and issuance. Under the PPH, an applicant with allowable claims in either a US or Canadian patent application may request that the other country’s patent office provide a fast track examination to the corresponding application. The sharing of search and examination results between offices is intended to expedite and improve the quality of examination.

As an example of how the PPH works, if a US patent application is examined and claims are approved as patentable (“allowable”) by the US . . . [more]

Following on the heels of Ontario’s draconian Road Safety Act (discussed at some length in one of my earlier Slaw posts) The B.C. Liberal government has introduced legislation that would create a Provincial offence for driving with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) between 0.05-0.08 (the Criminal Code legal limit is 0.08). The penalty for a first offender would be a 3-day driving ban plus a $200 fine rising from there for each subsequent offence.

Not to be outdone by Ontario though, B.C.’s law proposes to go a step further by also creating a Provincial offence of driving over 0.08. . . . [more]