The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) revoked the license of CKLN-FM 88.1 in Toronto, in a decision released on January 28, 2011.

CKLN was established in 1983 as Toronto’s first campus radio station, located on the campus of Ryerson Universiy. It features a variety of ethnic, cultural, and local programming, servicing multiple niche areas not addressed by mainstream radio stations. Their license was last renewed on August 13, 2007, for a seven-year period.

The station has been plagued by disputes and disorganization, resulting in the CRTC raising concerns over compliance with the Radio Regulations, 1986 and the CRTC’s Campus . . . [more]

Three years ago, the Quebec Ministère de la Justice published an exhaustive guide for relations between the media and the courts. The guide imposed access restrictions on journalists, who wanted much broader access to film, take photographs and conduct interviews in the public areas of courthouses, and they also want to broadcast the official audio recordings of court proceedings.. It was challenged constitutionally by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, Groupe TVA, La Presse Ltée and the Fédération professionnelle des journalistes du Québec, as a breach of constitutional guarantees of freedom of speech and media freedoms. After a seventeen day trial, . . . [more]

Sources of Egyptian Law.

I previously covered the Vigna v. Levant decision, where Ezra Levant was ordered to remove defamatory blog posts against Giacamo Vigna.

At least one reader expressed interest in costs, as Vigna is a lawyer and was self-represented for part of the action. Justice Smith released the costs decision on January 26, 2011 and awarded Vigna over $32,500 plus taxes in costs, exceeding the $25,000 damages awarded in the judgment. . . . [more]

Wired has an article today about how exactly Egyptian officials managed to shut down the internet there, in an effort to suppress speech. This happened yesterday, and while news is not hard to find (Al Jazeera seems to have the most complete coverage), I gather the shut-down has hampered protesters considerably.

As a result, the “Obama’s Internet Kill-Switch” issue has taken on new profile. Here are some leads into the Lieberman-Collins Bill.

And in related news, corporate control of internet traffic in the US faces an encouraging initiative from Senators Maria Cantwell and Al Franken: A . . . [more]

On Tuesday, in a decision called Kaptyn v. Kaptyn, Justice D.M. Brown strongly criticized virtually all parties involved in an estate dispute, who collectively claimed $4.4 million in costs arising out of a four day hearing and 14 pre-hearing motions.

Concluding the two trustees were “unable to work together in any reasonable and effective way,” Justice D.M. Brown said the competing sides “cannot reasonably expect that unlimited judicial resources are available to devote to their internecine quarrels,” adding (with apparent frustration) (i) that the Commercial List in Toronto is “chronically short of judges,” (ii) that the “scheduling of criminal . . . [more]

Brian Coldin, a naturist and owner of a nude resort in Barrie, Ontario, considers clothing optional even in public places. Coldin has launched a constitutional challenge of the Criminal Code provisions against public nudity, saying the Code limits freedom of expression and is too broad. Coldin’s lawyer, Clayton Ruby, calls the Code’s nudity provisions an oddity, meaning they are outdated and improperly worded.

When can a unionized employer discipline an employee for off-duty conduct?

This question is age-old, but is particularly relevant today given the frequency of disputes about off-duty internet expression. The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal issued a decision yesterday that addresses the so-called “nexus test” for employers’ disciplinary jurisdiction. It held that an arbitrator did not err by finding harm to reputation but failing to find a sufficient nexus to the workplace to warrant discipline.

The matter underlying this finding is about a 40-year-old school caretaker who a school board discharged for having a sexual relationship with a 15-year-old girl. . . . [more]

I just finished listening to another IT-Can teleconference on the anti-spam act, this one presented by Barry Sookman and Lorne Salzman of McCarthy Tetrault. For those wanting more detail, slides will be posted soon on the IT-Can website, the McCarthy Tetrault website, and Barry’s blog.

It reinforced my earlier concerns that this legislation is going to affect almost every business or organization. Many of its provisions strike me as a sledgehammer to kill a fly approach. Some of the highlights from the teleseminar are as follows:

Why be concerned?

There are large penalties for violations. They include extensive awards for . . . [more]

The problems aren’t always caused by unrepresented litigants.

• The Attorney General of Canada v. Maria Valde, 2011 ONSC 328
• “In the Matter of an Application pursuant to section 29 of the Extradition Act for an order committing the Respondent to await the Minister’s decision on whether the Respondent should be surrendered to the Republic of Hungary”
• [1] The Republic of Hungary seeks the extradition of Maria Valde a.k.a. Maria Ramsay to face charges for conduct considered criminal in Canada, namely fraud. For the reasons that follow, I dismiss the application.
• [7] The test for committal

. . . [more]

I’ve set out excerpts from just-released reasons. The words in square brackets are my comments.

Farrell v. The General of the Salvation Army, 2011 ONSC 317

• [2] The Plaintiff’s Amended Statement of Claim (“the Claim”) comprises 226 pages and 2,589 paragraphs, some incorrectly numbered. The Claim names 62 Defendants but contains repetitions of some of them. The claims against eight of the Defendants have been dismissed.[1] There are currently claims against only 13 Defendants.
• [3] The damage claim is $1,030,681,760. The Claim arises from alleged experiences the Plaintiff had during an 18 month stay at the Hope Shelter, an

. . . [more]

The perils of a shanked shot reflects a commonly appreciated risk of golf.