Canada’s online legal magazine.

Archive for ‘Substantive Law’

Journalistic Sources Protection Act Evaluated by Supreme Court

Despite the important role that the media plays in a democracy, Canada has long lagged behind other jurisdictions when it came to source protection. When law enforcement sought an order under the Criminal Code or compelled disclosure was sought through civil discovery, the courts were forced to resort to common law principles.

With the passing of Bill S-231 -An Act to amend the Canada Evidence Act and the Criminal Code in 2017, Canada formalized these protections through the Journalistic Sources Protection Act.

Some of the main features of the Act include a broad definition of a journalist. The Court . . . [more]

Posted in: Substantive Law: Judicial Decisions

Lack of Clarity on Discretionary Payments Benefited Terminated Employee

Written by Daniel Standing LL.B., Editor, First Reference

In Thoma v Schaefer Elevator Components Inc., 2019 BCSC 100 (CanLII), the British Columbia Supreme Court re-affirms the need for employers to establish and communicate clear and explicit rules when discretionary bonuses form part of an organization’s compensation scheme. These rules should regulate an employee’s entitlement to bonus payments (both during employment and during a notice period), as well as the eligibility criteria and how and when payments are to be made. This case shows how a lack of clarity in this respect can expose an employer to significant financial liability, . . . [more]

Posted in: Case Comment, Practice of Law: Practice Management, Substantive Law, Substantive Law: Judicial Decisions

UK Supreme Court on Prorogation: The Role of Unwritten Constitutional Principles

This morning, the UK Supreme Court issued its unanimous decision on Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s advice to the Queen to prorogue Parliament. Its decision in R (on the application of Miller) v. The Prime Minister and Cherry and others v. Advocate General for Scotland held that the Prime Minister had broken the law because the length of the prorogation without reasonable justification “prevented Parliament from carrying out its constitutional role [of holding the Government to account]” [para.56].

The decision is significant in finding that considering whether the Prime Minister acted lawfully in this instance is justiciable and that the reasons . . . [more]

Posted in: Substantive Law: Judicial Decisions

Court of Appeal Finds No Expression Interests in Bill 5

Toronto might be the megalith of cities when it comes to Canada’s metropolis, but it has no constitutional authority to oppose the province’s interference with municipal elections. That is the invariable conclusion arising out of the Ontario Court of Appeal’s decision this week.

The split 3-2 decision largely focused on two main issues. The first, whether unwritten constitutional principles could provide a basis to resist provincial modifications of the election, was unanimously decided by the court. The dissent only differed from the majority on the applicability of s. 2(b) rights in the circumstances of an ongoing election.

The majority was . . . [more]

Posted in: Substantive Law: Judicial Decisions

Workplace Safety Trumps Religious Observances in Quebec

The Quebec Court of Appeal has ruled against Sikh truck drivers who sought an exemption from wearing personal protective equipment – a helmet – as required by their employers because their religion requires them to wear a turban.

The Court ruled that workplace safety must take precedence over temporary impacts on freedom of religion.

According to Wikipedia, wearing a Sikh dastaar, or turban, is mandatory for all Sikh men. Among the Sikhs, the dastaar is an article of faith that represents honour, self-respect, courage, spirituality, and piety (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dastar).

Quick facts

In 2016, three Sikh truck drivers sought to be exempted . . . [more]

Posted in: Case Comment, Substantive Law, Substantive Law: Judicial Decisions, Substantive Law: Legislation

Challenging the Quebec End-of-Life Legislation and Medically-Assisted Dying in Truchon

In Truchon c. Attorney General of Canada, 2019 QCCS 3792 (CanLII), a decision of the Quebec Superior Court, The Honourable Christine Baudouin, JCS held that the end of life requirement under section 26 of Quebec’s End-of-Life Care Act and the “reasonable foreseeability of natural death” requirement under the Criminal Code‘s medically-assisted death requirement are both unconstitutional as contravening section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (and that the federal provision contravenes section 7; she did not consider whether the Quebec provision contavened section 7). The facts underpinning the challenges were the same. Nevertheless, should the . . . [more]

Posted in: Substantive Law: Judicial Decisions, Substantive Law: Legislation

New Measures to Cover Gap in Agent Representation

On June 21, 2019, Bill C-75, An Act to amend the Criminal Code, the Youth Criminal Justice Act and other Acts and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, received Royal Assent. The Bill was an omnibus legislation that was prompted by the delays caused described in Jordan and Cody.

The effect of this Bill was to remove preliminary inquiries for virtually all offences, expand spousal violence to include intimate partner violence, abolish the use of peremptory challenges for jurors, and hybridize almost all indictable offences under 10 years while increasing the maximum penalty to 2 years for summary . . . [more]

Posted in: Justice Issues, Substantive Law: Legislation

The Supreme Court of Canada Decisions’ Website Is Evolving

Some of you may have noticed that after over 25 years of being hosted exclusively under the Lexum domain at https://scc-csc.lexum.com, the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) judgments are now also available under the Court’s own domain at https://decisions.scc-csc.ca. On top of the new URL, the database has been graphically integrated with the SCC institutional website, making it easier to navigate between judgments and the rest of the information published online by the court.

Renée Thériault, the Court’s Executive Legal Officer, says “This initiative is part of the Court’s continued efforts to make case-related information more accessible . . . [more]

Posted in: Legal Information, Substantive Law: Judicial Decisions, Technology: Internet

Time to Review Your Accessibility Plans and Prepare to File a Report in 2020

1. Review your multi-year accessibility plans by January 1, 2020

On January 1, 2014, section 4(1) of the Integrated Accessibility Standards, Ontario Regulation 191/11 under the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA) required the Government of Ontario, Legislative Assembly, designated public sector organizations and large organizations (50 plus employees) to have multi-year accessibility plans in place and posted on their websites (if any), and to provide the plan in an accessible format upon request.

The multi-year accessibility plan must inform and outline the organization’s strategy for preventing and removing barriers faced by persons with disabilities and also for meeting . . . [more]

Posted in: Legal Information, Legal Information: Information Management, Legal Information: Libraries & Research, Legal Information: Publishing, Miscellaneous, Practice of Law, Practice of Law: Marketing, Practice of Law: Practice Management, Substantive Law, Substantive Law: Legislation, Technology, Technology: Internet, Technology: Office Technology

Questions Arising From the Anti-Carbon Tax Sticker Legislation (Including the Fixing of the Set Fine)

A short Canadian Press article in The Globe and Mail recently tweaked my interest. It explained that the chief justice had set the fine for not posting the anti-carbon tax stickers the province has required gas station operators to post on pumps at $150. The legislation provides for potentially higher fines. I started thinking about several issues that could arise from this, especially in the context of the anti-carbon tax sticker legislation. . . . [more]

Posted in: Substantive Law: Legislation

The New Victim Quick Response Program in Ontario

The 2019 Ontario Budget, released in March, introduced a number of sweeping changes, including a focus on “Ensuring Agencies are Relevant, Efficient and Effective.”

One of these proposed changes was to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board (CICB), to replace the quasi-judicial tribunal model established under the Compensation for Victims of Crime Act with an administrative model. This as then introduced and passed under Bill 100, Protecting What Matters Most Act (Budget Measures). The rationale, as with much of the legal reforms in this budget, is to reduce the expenses related to the adversarial process and expend resources directly . . . [more]

Posted in: Justice Issues, Substantive Law: Legislation

Publicly Discussing Results of Confidential Settlement

Utilizing of the media, including social media, is an essential aspect of any civil litigator’s strategic arsenal. The Model Code of Professional Conduct outlines in Rule 7.5 the circumstances where a lawyer can communicate information to the media, which includes obligations to the client, the profession, the courts, or the administration of justice.

These communications must still be in the best interest of the client, and conducted in a professional manner. They should also not communicate any information that has a “substantial likelihood of materially prejudicing a party’s right to a fair trial or hearing.”

Communications with the media should . . . [more]

Posted in: Substantive Law: Judicial Decisions

3li_EnFr_Wordmark_W

This project has been made possible in part by the Government of Canada | Ce projet a été rendu possible en partie grâce au gouvernement du Canada