Today is Earth Day, or as the United Nations calls it, International Mother Earth Day. It was first celebrated in 1970, which also coincided with the founding of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The EPA has a webpage highlighting the history of the agency and the role it has played in promoting environmentalism,

It may be hard to imagine that before 1970, a factory could spew black clouds of toxic into the air or dump tons of toxic waste into a nearby stream, and that was perfectly legal. They could not be taken to court to stop

. . . [more]

An interesting human rights case is making its way to the European Court of Human Rights where the British government is set to defend the right of employers to ban employees from wearing the cross at work as it is not a ‘requirement’ of the Christian faith

The Supreme Court today released its decisions in the van Breda, Banro and Black cases. It dismissed all three appeals.

I want to look in particular at van Breda, which deals at length with jurisdiction simpliciter and with forum non conveniens, with a discussion of real and substantial connection and a sideways glace at enforcement of foreign judgments (not yet at issue in this case, of course.) The Court, per Justice Lebel, sets out the principles of private international law.

In particular the Court upholds the Ontario Court of Appeal’s refinement of the factors that indicate a . . . [more]

We may not be the most wealthy nation in the world, or have the most powerful military. But when it comes to the legal influence of our constitution on other countries, it seems that Canada tops the list.

This Tuesday we celebrate the Charter’s 30th anniversary, and there is plenty to rejoice about. The New York University Law Review is publishing an article in their upcoming June issue which mathematically calculates the relative global influence of the constitutions of different countries, and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms surpasses even our American neighbours. The finding is so surprising in some . . . [more]

This weekend near midnight on Saturday, will mark 100 years since the unsinkable ocean liner hit an iceburg on its maiden voyage and sank; which around these parts is a big deal. The magnitude of the event was so great that it resonates 100 years later. This event has entered our popular conciousness as it is common to hear of something that did not go well, that it was a disaster of “titanic proportions”; in a way the sinking of the Titanic has become the standard by which disasters are measured. Have you ever felt that you were “arranging . . . [more]

The Australian Attorney General has recently published a discussion document “to explore the scope for reforming Australian contract law”.

The document asks for comments on whether and how contract law impairs economic activity within Australia and separately for international economic activity. Australia’s contract law is basically the English Sale of Goods Act and common law, of course with legislative changes and the contributions of Australian courts. Australia is a member state of the Convention on the International Sale of Goods.

The consultation document starts off well, in my view, with this statement: “Our legal system is a form of infrastructure . . . [more]

Canada Post has begun legal proceedings against Geolytica Inc. (carrying on business as Geocoder.ca), a small Ottawa business that offers a mix of free and commercial geocoding services. The claim is that Geolytica has infringed Canada Post’s copyright in the postal code dataset by offering it for sale. (The full statement of claim is available here, as published on the defendant’s website.) Geolytica, by way of response, asserts on its website that:

Since 2004 we have crowdsourced* the generation of the “Canadian Postal Code Geocoded Database.” When you make a query to geocoder containing for example this

. . . [more]

Currently, the Canadian Human Rights Act prohibits discrimination based on a person’s sex and sexual orientation, among other grounds. However, the prohibited ground of sex and sexual orientation is considered by advocacy groups as inadequate to clearly inform the public at large that unreasonable discrimination on the basis of gender identity and gender expression is prohibited; hence, the creation of Bill C-279.

On March 26, 2012, the Attorney General of British Columbia announced that special prosecutor lawyer Peter Wilson has been given expanded powers to lay charges against polygamists in the province.

In my new role as in-house counsel for a business with operations across Canada (and as a Quebecker), I’ve been doing a lot of explaining about la belle Province. My American colleagues are used to dealing with a Federal version of our provincial labour codes that applies (generally) in a uniform manner across all of the United States. In Canada, as we know, labour relations are provincially regulated and accordingly, differ from one province to another (save for federally regulated employees). However, the laws of Quebec are different from other provinces and allow for easier access to unionization and . . . [more]

A Committee of UK Members of Parliament has recommended that search engines should have to remove material from search results that infringe privacy. Here is a news report on the committee’s recommendations. Here is The Committee’s document.

It looks as if they are talking about material that has been found by a court to be an invasion of privacy, rather than having to make that initial decision. But once a court has found a story or a picture to offend privacy interests, the search engines should have to develop a method of hunting down that story or picture and . . . [more]

I thought Slaw readers might be interested in the actual text of the Florida legislation that, in theory at least, governs the Trayvon Martin case. Title XLVI, Chapter 776.012 governs “Use of force in defense of person”:

A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:

. . . [more]