The Law Commission of Ontario has been reviewing the principles and impact of artificial intelligence (AI) in the Canadian justice system for some years. Its three points of focus have been on the use of AI in criminal justice, in civil justice and in government. A report was issued in late 2020 on criminal justice aspects. It was described in Slaw.ca here.

The second report is on government uses, under the title Regulating AI: Critical Issues and Choices. As with the criminal paper, there is a helpful Executive Summary as well.

Regulating AI presents a lot of challenges, . . . [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:

• Operations Manager – College of Patent Agents and Trademark Agents (Full-time) | Remote/Canada
  (College of Patent and Trademark Agents of Canada)

By Daniel Standing LL.B., Editor, First Reference Inc.

The vague yet intriguing title of the case, in the Matter of B, 2020 ONSC 7563 (CanLII), foretells some of the secrecy and confidentiality of the facts behind the matter. The Honourable Barbara A. Campbell, Justice of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice authors an interesting decision sure to please any aficionado of the law of evidence. In it, she considers whether an employment agreement’s confidentiality clause sufficiently shields an employee from testifying about his or her employer in an investigation by the Ontario Securities Commission. Does the clause render the information . . . [more]

In my view, the simplest answer to this issue [videoconference or in-person] is, “It’s 2020”. We no longer record evidence using quill and ink. In fact, we apparently do not even teach children to use cursive writing in all schools anymore. We now have the technological ability to communicate remotely effectively. Using it is more efficient and far less costly than personal attendance. We should not be going back.

Justice Frederick L. Myers, Ontario Superior Court of Justice in Arconti v. Smith, 2020 ONSC 2782

What will be the place of virtual hearings in a post-pandemic world? Can . . . [more]

For all the hardship and tragic loss of human life that the current pandemic has wrought – even as we look for signs of the scourge’s end – it has had, I would hold, a positive effect on science. The last year or so has impressed upon many in the sciences that the more open and collaborative forms of research that mark the fight against Covid-19 will be worth retaining as a better way of doing science across the board. Among the earliest points of this opening, which came before the WHO classified this novel coronavirus, was the move of . . . [more]

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

For this last week:

1. Prowse et al. v. Noroozi, 2021 ONSC 3099 (CanLII)

[52] There is no genuine issue that the Plaintiffs are entitled to claim the foregone interest on the VTB. While not an out of pocket expense per se, it would be a recoverable loss to the Plaintiffs in the form of expectation damages. However, I would infer that the purpose of the . . . [more]

In July 2020, the Ontario Legislative Assembly enacted new legislation governing the provision of legal aid in the province, Legal Aid Services Act, 2020 (“2020 Act”). The legislation does not come into force until it has been proclaimed by the Lieutenant-Governor and that won’t happen until new rules have been finalized. The board of Legal Aid Ontario (LAO) (called “the Corporation” under the 2020 Act) has the authority under section 46 of the 2020 Act to make rules governing the provision of legal aid. The proposed rules are currently available for comment on Legal Aid Ontario’s website (more on that . . . [more]

Conflict management professionals have struggled for many years whether to take a “facilitative” or an “evaluative” approach in mediation. This either/or analysis is much too simplistic and grounded in false assumptions. We need a more nuanced approach, drawing on a wide variety of “styles” and tools which are tailored to meet the needs of the situation and the parties. Professor John Lande recently published a concise and helpful article advocating for such an approach.

My mediation training was based in the facilitative approach, but I found this difficult in practice because of my legal training and experience. It seemed to . . . [more]

Here are excerpts from the most recent tips on SlawTips, the site that each week offers up useful advice, short and to the point, on practice, research, writing and technology.

Research & Writing

Finding Ontario Court Information Online
Susannah Tredwell

Ontario now allows legal professionals to search for Superior Court of Justice court cases online. To search, you will need to set up a ONe-key account. (There is no cost to set up an account.) … . . . [more]

On April 22, 2021, the Law Society of Ontario approved a “Regulatory Sandbox for Innovative Technological Legal Services”, a five-year pilot project through which non-licensee providers will be given the LSO’s blessing to provide “innovative technological legal services” directly to consumers, under the LSO’s supervision. The sandbox was recommended by the LSO’s Technology Task Force in its report released on April 13, 2021. The sandbox is currently slated to launch in October 2021.

The proposed regulatory sandbox emerges after over three years of study by the Technology Task Force, which the LSO established in February 2018. Although it has taken . . . [more]

Over a year ago, the provincial government introduced new emergency leaves for workers sick from COVID-19. This was soon followed by special provisions for termination and severance under the Employment Standards Act, 2000 (ESA), which many people speculated was likely unenforceable and would be deemed constructive dismissal.

Justice Broad of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice recently dismissed a motion for summary judgment on April 16, 2021, in Coutinho v. Ocular Health Centre Ltd., where the defendant unsuccessfully attempted to rely on these special termination provisions. This is likely the first reported decision in Ontario to interpret these regulations. . . . [more]