Ontario’s Court of Appeal yesterday issued decisions in 6 cases arising out of challenges to the mandatory minimum sentences imposed with respect to various firearms-related offences. In two of those decisions, R. v. Smickle and R. v. Nur, the Court found that the mandatory minimum sentence provisions of s. 95 of the Criminal Code breached s. 12 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, but did not breach s. 7 of the Charter.

Two recent decisions from the Court of Queen’s Bench in Manitoba have similarly challenged the constitutionality of the Criminal Code’s mandatory minimum sentencing provisions in relation . . . [more]

We know that today marks the start of the Senate reform reference at the Supreme Court of Canada. I am certain that many of us wish we had three days to devote to viewing the webcasts of this event. If you cannot make the time for full attention to the webcast, Eugene Meehan kindly tweeted some of the grab and go information sources.

Tweet by tweet coverage is being handled by:

• @cmathen
• @alisoncrawford5
• @pauldayesq
• @TondaMacC
• @journo_dale
• @fionahmcfarlane

There are some hashtags that are currently in use including #SenCa #SCC and #cdnpoli

If you are planning to watch an SCC Webcast, . . . [more]

On the day that the Supreme Court begins to hear argument in the federal government’s reference concerning reform of the Senate (In the Matter of a Reference by the Governor in Council concerning reform of the Senate, as set out in Order P.C. 2013-70, dated February 1, 2013), it is appropriate, perhaps, to point out that the judgment by Québec’s Court of Appeal in a reference begun by the provincial government is in fact available in English.

Projet de loi fédéral relatif au sénat (Re) 2013 QCCA 1807 was summarized by SOQUIJ for Slaw last Sunday, and, . . . [more]

IP Osgoode has put online a series of videos of the panel discussions held during their symposium on User-Generated Content (UGC) Under Canadian Copyright Law held at Osgoode Hall Law School a month ago. You can see all six of the videos on the IPOsgoode site or view them on YouTube, the links for which are below:

• Video I: Practical Examples of UGC – Daniel Rosen, Gordon Duggan, Victor Nabhan (Panel Chair)
• Video II: Legal Aspects of UGC – Victor Nabhan, Samuel Trosow, Leonard Glickman, Pina D’Agostino (Panel Chair)
• Video III: Specific UGC Legal Aspects – Eva

. . . [more]

The Supreme Court of Canada released its unanimous decision in R. v. Vu this week, dealing with s. 8 of the Charter and the search and seizure of electronic devices such as computers and cellphones.

The police were interested in the potential theft of electricity for a specific home and obtained a search warrant. The warrant in this case did not specify the search of the accused’s computer in their Information to Obtain a Search Warrant (“ITO”), although it did indicate “computer generated notes.” The search revealed marijuana plants, and the charges included production of marijuana, possession of marijuana for . . . [more]

The day after the federal government identified genetic discrimination as a priority in its speech from the throne on October 16, 2013, Senator James S. Cowan re-introduced Bill S-201, An Act to prohibit and prevent genetic discrimination in the Senate.

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.

David Canton in his post today praised the IT.CAN conference. I, too, attended, and I agree: it’s the one to catch for IT/IP folks. Among the many things that caught my ear was a small reference to sound marks — that is, trade marks for the ear rather than the eye.

These are new to me, and relatively new to Canadian jurisprudence, though when I thought about it for a moment I realized that they were a perfectly sensible addition to the IP roster. (For some support for that conclusion, see a 2010 post on IP Osgoode — and . . . [more]

Remembrance Day is fast approaching. It’s a time to reflect on the sacrifices of our veterans, serving regular force members and reservists members of the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF). Since the war in Afghanistan, the Canadian public’s awareness and support of the CAF has increased significantly and has been maintained despite the draw down in operations in the part of the world.

When I joined the CAF in 2003 as an Army reservist, while public support was on the increase, legal support in the form of job protection for reservists was almost non-existent. Thankfully, in the 10 years since then, . . . [more]

The Ontario Court of Appeal released a decision this month involving a dispute between physician residents and the University of Ottawa which again emphasizes the level of deference the courts are willing to offer educational institutions.

The plaintiffs in Aba-Alkhail v. University of Ottawa were physicians from Saudi Arabia who were completing their postgraduate medical residency at the University of Ottawa. All received some form of discipline or complaints which they attributed to discrimination based on their national origin. The university Senate dismissed the residents’ appeal of their dismissal from the medical program.

Complaints were brought before the human rights . . . [more]

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.