I wrote about the Supreme Court of Canada’s recent restatement of the open court principle in a column last year. In that column I suggested that the court had opened the door for more requests for closed hearings in its decision of Sherman Estate v. Donovan, 2021 SCC 25. Some courts have disagreed with this assessment and at least one court has agreed with it. What is clear from the recent caselaw is that courts are more focused on the evidence necessary to support confidentiality in what would otherwise be open proceedings. Speculation of harm to an important public . . . [more]

INTRODUCTION

The Ford Government’s invocation of section 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in Bill 28 prohibiting education workers from striking and imposing a contract on them has once again raised cries of “this isn’t what the notwithstanding clause is for”. Really? What exactly did everyone expect to happen? Here I explain why I think section.33 has always been a ticking time bomb — and that there’s nothing that can be done about it except through strength of public opinion. . . . [more]

I have championed ways of increasing the public availability of research and scholarship in these Slaw columns for well over a decade under a variety of names, from open access to the catchy right to research (R2R). I picked up R2R, as I’ve noted, from the inspiring Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property at the American University Washington College of Law in an initiative led by Sean Flynn. What I’ve now realized about R2R is that it can be read in two historically significant ways, with the difference between them neatly capturing what sets Prof Flynn’s and my current . . . [more]

Each Wednesday we tell you which three English-language cases and French-language cases have been the most viewed* on CanLII and we give you a small sense of what the cases are about. La version française suit.

For this last week, the three most-consulted English-language decisions were:

1. R. v. Ndhlovu, 2022 SCC 38 (CanLII)

[1] Parliament and courts have increasingly recognized the grave harms which flow from the wide variety of sexual offences prohibited in the Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46. Over the years, the substantive elements of some sexual offences have been modified: consent is now . . . [more]

Family lawyers cross-examining victims of intimate partner violence (“IPV”) gets little attention in legal ethics literature. To be sure, there is a considerable debate and body of scholarship focused on the conduct of lawyers acting in criminal sexual assault cases, much of which can be analogized to IPV. However, in the family law context there are usually multiple issues to be determined, including the well-being of a third party (i.e.: a child). There are serious problems in family law with abusive spouses self-representing to gain access to their former partner and directly questioning them about the abuse. But my concern . . . [more]

Timing is one of the hardest parts of teaching. At the very beginning of lesson planning, I sometimes have the fear that I cannot fill the time, but my more common problem is having too much content and too little time. I’ve learned to plan my timing down to five-minute increments, to hold a pause for questions far longer than I would like, and to set expectations and then set a visible timer.

When I write or revise my class plans, I mark the parts of the plan with time limits, rounded to the nearest five minutes. Normally, I think . . . [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) : Une peine de 6 ans d’emprisonnement est imposée à une enseignante ayant plaidé coupable notamment sous le chef d’accusation de contacts sexuels à l’endroit d’un enfant âgé de 8 ans auquel elle offrait des services de tutorat.

Intitulé : R. c. Lévesque, 2022 QCCQ 6808
Juridiction :  . . . [more]

Each Friday, we share the latest job listings from Slaw Jobs, which features employment opportunities from across the country. Find out more about these positions by following the links below, or learn how you can use Slaw Jobs to gain valuable exposure for your job ads, while supporting the great Canadian legal commentary at Slaw.ca.

Current postings on Slaw Jobs:a

• Family Lawyer (Full-time) | Langley, BC
  (Waterstone Law Group LLP)
• Senior Conveyancer (Full-time) | Langley, BC
  (Waterstone Law Group LLP)
• Litigation Lawyer (Full-time) | Chilliwack, BC
  (Waterstone Law Group LLP)
• Litigation Associate (Full-time) | Vancouver, BC
  (Bernard LLP)

The published information relating to the disposal, by Informa to Montagu, of Lloyd’s Maritime Intelligence is, thus far, relatively light on detail and plans, certainly as regards that part of the business unit which might be described as law publishing, perhaps with i-Law.com as its future hub. It may be that it will sit well and flourish within its new corporate environment and even offer added value opportunities for other former Informa businesses such as Emerging Portfolio Funds Research (EPFR) and/or businesses which previously were not with Informa, notably Jane’s. However, that would be a surprise to me. . . . [more]

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

Thankfully for servers who work in restaurants, most patrons aren’t like Mr. Pink from the movie Reservoir Dogs who refused to tip. The practice of tipping used to strictly involve cash, but in more recent times, when customers pay for their meals electronically, they often include a tip, leaving it up to the employer to dole them out. The question at issue in 2022 FCA 151 is whether the employer’s payout of tips to its servers is to be considered contributory salary under the Canada Pension Plan, and insurable earnings under . . . [more]

I wish to respond to the NSRLP’s August 9^th post entitled The Failure of Unbundled Legal Services to Meet the Crisis in Access to Justice. While I loved the article, the title gave me pause.

The title implies that unbundled legal services have been a failure. Yet the body of the article says:

For all these reasons, unbundled service ought to be a practical and useful alternative for increasing access to justice for many more litigants, for a more efficient legal system, and for a mutually satisfying service model for both clients and lawyers.

Perhaps the title was intended . . . [more]