A New Year Has Begun! And good legal information keeps on coming from the law librarians at the Law Library of Congress. Here are some notes from the latest releases:

January 9th, Congress.gov top 22:

“We are always working to incorporate your feedback into making Congress.gov an even better experience. One major request was one of the biggest items that the Congress.gov team worked on last year: the new Congress.gov API (application programming interface).”

January 12^th, Foreign Legal Gazette update:

“In fall 2022, the Law Library of Congress added foreign legal gazettes for the countries of Niger,

Given the backlog in our courts and administrative tribunals in Ontario, it is likely that artificial intelligence will begin to be used for routine, procedural matters to reduce delays. In the book Online Courts and the Future of Justice, Richard Susskind writes that our courts are moving towards radical change rather than more of the same. Susskind predicts that artificial intelligence will be used to adjudicate and contain claims, and that the 2020s will be a period of redeployment of lawyers and judges. By 2030, our courts will be transformed by technologies, many of which are yet to be . . . [more]

Members of Parliament are expected to advocate for their constituents. However, when that MP is a Minister of the Crown (or a Parliamentary Secretary) there are limits on how far that advocacy can go.

Interference by a Minister in a particular case before a tribunal has long been considered as an inappropriate interference with tribunal independence. This self-evident rule of non-interference was recognized in a document prepared by the federal government in 2015: Open and Accountable Government: “Ministers must not intervene, or appear to intervene, with tribunals on any matter requiring a decision in their quasi-judicial capacity, except as . . . [more]

One Sunday each month we bring you a summary from Supreme Advocacy LLP of recent decisions at the Supreme Court of Canada. Supreme Advocacy LLP offers a weekly electronic newsletter, Supreme Advocacy Letter, to which you may subscribe. It’s a summary of all Appeals, Oral Judgments and Leaves to Appeal granted from Jan. 1 – Feb. 15, 2023 inclusive.

Oral Judgments

Criminal Law: Sexual Offences; Hearsay
R. v. S.S., 2022 ONCA 305; 2023 SCC 1 (40147)

There is a publication ban in this case. The Chief Justice: “A majority of this Court would allow the appeal, substantially . . . [more]

Every week we present the summary of a decision handed down by a Québec court provided to us by SOQUIJ and considered to be of interest to our readers throughout Canada. SOQUIJ is attached to the Québec Department of Justice and collects, analyzes, enriches, and disseminates legal information in Québec.

PÉNAL (DROIT) : Le juge de première instance s’est appuyé sur l’absence d’exagération dans l’évaluation du témoignage de la plaignante afin de renforcer la crédibilité de celle-ci, contrairement aux enseignements de l’arrêt R. c. Gerrard (C.S. Can., 2022-04-19), 2022 CSC 13, SOQUIJ AZ-51848182; même si le juge a fourni d’autres . . . [more]

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

A limitation period is a contractual or statutory provision that bars the filing of a lawsuit, grievance or formal complaint, depending on the context. When a party misses a filing deadline, it’s not like missing the bus. The results can be profound and hinge on a determination of whether the limitation period was missed in good faith, as we see in [2023] O.H.R.T.D. No. 68. As it turns out, it takes more than simply being sick or having a disability to justify filing a late claim. . . . [more]

It is occasionally difficult to convince students of the wonder of research: you never know what you might find! At the same time, students who believe in that wonder sometimes believe that there can be no method at all, as magical research results must only lie at the end of long and tortuous journeys which can never be repeated or described. I believe that there are methods and patterns to research, but I also know that even while following simple principles the path of research often feels twisty. The One Good Case method is one of the simple principles that . . . [more]

At the beginning of each month, we tell you which three English-language cases and French-language cases have been the most viewed* on CanLII in the previous month and we give you a small sense of what the cases are about. La version française suit.

For this past month, the three most-consulted English-language decisions were:

1. Rahmal-Shah v. Jones et al., 2023 ONSC 820 (CanLII)

The Supreme Court of Canada has heard several family law cases involving intimate partner violence (“IPV”) in which they erased the abuse. Pettkus v Becker, [1980] 2 SCR 834 is perhaps the most well-known family law example of the tragic consequences of ignoring a survivor’s experience.[1] Less well-known, are the cases developing the law governing domestic contracts. Beyond the obvious trauma inflicted on survivors whose cases are heard but whose experiences are ignored, is the question of what the implications are for the soundness of the law generated by ignoring IPV. One of the issues discussed in these domestic . . . [more]

Every week we present the summary of a decision handed down by a Québec court provided to us by SOQUIJ and considered to be of interest to our readers throughout Canada. SOQUIJ is attached to the Québec Department of Justice and collects, analyzes, enriches, and disseminates legal information in Québec.

PÉNAL (DROIT) : La culpabilité d’un ancien haut dirigeant au sein du groupe SNC-Lavalin inc., déclaré coupable de fraude d’une valeur de plus de 5 000 $, de corruption d’un agent public étranger, de recyclage des produits de la criminalité et de recel d’argent et de biens, est confirmée; la . . . [more]

Many of us work in support of Access to Justice. A2J is an important response to injustice. But why do we do it? What compels us to strive to work in this field? What sustains us in this work?

For most of us it is certainly not financial reward (although there is undoubtedly money to be made by inventing and selling new tools and processes). It may be a need to “give back” out of gratitude for our experience as professionals in the justice system. It may feel like a moral or ethical calling. Perhaps it is all of the . . . [more]