As we have seen in the last year, technology can improve access to justice. A new product called Courtbot is another great example of technology improving interactions with the courts.

The new App Courtbot helps remind litigants of upcoming court appearances. It is a text-messaging App based in Oklahoma.

According to its website, once clients text their case number to Courtbot, clients receive an automatic reminder of court dates. Courtbot claims that “research shows that reminders work… Around 25% of the people in Tulsa County Jail are waiting for their cases to be heard, costing taxpayers up to $25,000 per . . . [more]

The New Year is here, and with it comes the promise of new beginnings and possibilities. It is a time for setting resolutions and crafting ambitious plans for the year ahead.

And what do we all know? Making plans and setting resolutions is swiftly followed by the challenge of implementation when the deluge of day-to-day work resurges.

As one lawyer asked me recently: “How do I find the time?

An excellent question. How do we find the time when we are in a scramble of managing a myriad of emails, client needs, and administrative tasks piling up around us?

The . . . [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. Canadian Broadcasting Corporation v Canadian Media Guild, 2021 CanLII 761 (CA LA)

While violating an employer policy may be grounds for discipline, expressing disagreement with a policy is not. I fail to see any basis for discipline in this message, and I agree with the union that if employees could lose their jobs for privately criticizing their bosses – even if . . . [more]

In my last Slaw post (January 12, 2021), the first of two parts, I discussed the characteristics necessary for law to be accepted and effective. Here I consider some of the laws — the legislation, the regulations, orders and, although not law, intended to have a similar impact, advice or recommendations — that have been imposed during the pandemic. I’m focusing on Ontario, although I refer to developments elsewhere. Even so, my discussion is not meant to be exhaustive, but to illustrate laws enacted during the pandemic that do or do not satisfy the requirements of acceptable and effective law. . . . [more]

The year 2020 will go down in history as the year when much changed. One thing seems to remain constant: the fact that the justice sector is slow to change. As a consequence, it seems to be missing a rather big boat.

Good things often come out of bad things. It is no different with the current crises we face. In its 5 December issue, The Economist carries an article that sets out how the pandemic is leading to unprecedented innovation and investment in the health sector. It sees the dawn of “the next trillion-dollar industry”. Patients are . . . [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

Key Takeaways
Neil Guthrie

This was cited in Guthrie’s Guide as an example of bad business jargon, without much additional commentary. Because of its ubiquity, this dreadful phrase merits a few words. … . . . [more]

On December 9, 2020, the United States took the initial step in the first formal trade dispute under the newly minted (July 1, 2020) Canada-United States Mexico Agreement (CUSMA). The U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) made a formal request for consultations with respect to Canada’s import limits on a variety of dairy products, claiming that these measures unfairly restrict U.S. dairy farmers’ access to the Canadian market contrary to CUSMA Article 3.A.2 of CUSMA.[1] Pursuant to CUSMA Chapter 31, the United States may request the establishment of a dispute settlement panel if the matter is not resolved by consultations.

While . . . [more]

On December 1, 2020, Dr. Sott Atlas resigned his position as “special advisor [on the coronavirus] to the president of the United States.” Many of us breathed a sigh of relief, if through our masks. After all, my Stanford colleagues had voted for a faculty senate resolution, that condemned this Stanford-affiliated man’s “disdain for established medical knowledge.” To take but one example I’ll return to below, Atlas had tweeted “Masks work? NO,” citing Oxford Professor Carl Heneghan.

What Atlas illustrates for me, as a long-time advocate of open access to research and scholarship, is a cautionary result of this . . . [more]

Twitter has received a lot of public attention recently, most notably for banning the President of the United States from using the platform. 

A new decision by the British Columbia Supreme Court in Giustra v. Twitter, Inc. concluded that the court has jurisdiction simpliciter over the platform, and that the Canadian courts were a forum conviens for the purposes of litigation.

The plaintiff had strong connections to both British Columbia and California, the latter also being the location of the defendant and all of its documents.

The allegedly defamatory content related to various conspiracies touted by the far-right, also known . . . [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.

ACTION COLLECTIVE (RECOURS COLLECTIF) : Contrairement aux prétentions des appelantes, le recours de l’intimée n’est pas prescrit car, depuis la modification de l’article 2926.1 C.C.Q. en juin 2020, le recours de la victime d’un préjudice corporel résultant d’une agression à caractère sexuel est imprescriptible, et ce, sans égard à tout . . . [more]

One size does not fit all.

A simple survey of the measures put in place so that the justice system may continue operating in spite of restrictive measures to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 will bear that out.

Virtual hearings have been a lifesaver for some proceedings. But while they may have increased opportunities for some individuals – making it easier to attend court, for example, by reducing travel time, costs and need for childcare – for others they presented more challenges.

When the pandemic was declared and physical-distancing measures instituted, Canadian courts, administrative tribunals and other dispute resolution bodies . . . [more]