Periodically on Thursdays, we present a significant excerpt, usually from a recently published book or journal article. In every case the proper permissions have been obtained. If you are a publisher who would like to participate in this feature, please let us know via the site’s contact form.

GENERATION Z GOES TO LAW SCHOOL: TEACHING AND REACHING LAW STUDENTS IN THE POST-MILLENNIAL GENERATION
41 U. Ark. Little Rock L. Rev. 29 (2018). Republished with permission*.

Laura Graham, Director of Legal Analysis, Writing, and Research and Professor of Legal Writing, Wake Forest University School of Law

Excerpt: Abstract from . . . [more]

I recently saw an exciting legal tech product that has a lot of potential. I think it could make a lot of people’s lives much easier. And a partner wants to mandate its usage! You can probably see where this is going. It was a struggle the moment we tried to get others on board: elements didn’t line up with others’ preferences; people were upset about the learning curve; there was massive passive resistance.

This was just one of many similar experiences. It seems technology and persuasion are not sufficient – and barely necessary – to create sustainable mainstream adoption . . . [more]

Several times each month, we are pleased to republish a recent book review from the Canadian Law Library Review (CLLR). CLLR is the official journal of the Canadian Association of Law Libraries (CALL/ACBD), and its reviews cover both practice-oriented and academic publications related to the law.

One Law for All? Weber v Ontario Hydro and Canadian Labour Law: Essays in Memory of Bernie Adell. Edited by Elizabeth Shilton & Karen Schucher. Toronto: Irwin Law, 2017. vii, 382 p. Includes bibliographic references, table of cases, and index. ISBN 978-1-55221-454-1 (softcover) $65.00.

Reviewed by Catherine Cotter
Head Law . . . [more]

The Canadian government has released a Cyber security controls standards document meant for small and medium sized business (499 employees or less), along with a certification program called CyberSecure Canada.

Cyber risks seem to be getting worse. Dangers include external hackers, phishing and social engineering attempts, and intentional and unintentional internal leaks. Responsibility is now considered to be at the board level, and does not stop at the CIO.

Cyber security can be a daunting task for small business. As the standard says, normal security standards “… are expensive to implement, beyond the financial and/or human resources means of most . . . [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. Pollard Windows Inc. v 1736106 Ontario Inc., 2019 ONSC 4859

[51] In my view, having admitted liability formally, including admitting the facts on which liability was based, it is not open to 1746878 Ontario Inc. to withdraw its admission before this court without leave to now argue that the judge erred in finding it liable for contempt. Mr. Hutton argued that . . . [more]

Earlier this month, the Ontario Court of Appeal affirmed a broad view of public interest standing in Alford v. Canada (Attorney General) when it reversed a trial level decision denying Alford standing to challenge as unconstitutional a particular provision of the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians Act. . . . [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

Neither a Lender…
Neil Guthrie

Do you lend someone money or do you loan it? You can do either, in fact. (The noun is always loan.) The verb lend, in the sense of granting someone else temporary possession of something in the expectation of its eventual return, is an old one: Ælfric used it in his Grammar more than a thousand years ago. … . . . [more]

In this post I’m highlighting a really helpful and provocative article by Alyson Carrel and Noam Ebner [Note 1] entitled “Mind the Gap: Bringing Technology to the Mediation Table”. The article acknowledges the powerful force of technology in all parts of our lives and points out that the mediation field’s adoption of useful technology has been largely focused on offering online or “distance mediation” processes. The authors warn that unless the mediation field actively explores the use of technology in all parts of the mediation process, including in-person mediation, it risks becoming irrelevant to the next generation of mediators . . . [more]

Lawyers can sometimes be mundane in their construction of contracts, the the point where their scrutiny can appear pointless. Beyond just the contents, there is endless amount of time spent on syntax, grammar, and even punctuation.

There might be good reason for this, as the interpretation of these contracts can have a significant impact. A recent American cases focusing on commas has illustrated this quite clearly. In O’Connor v. Oakhurst Dairy, the United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit held that delivery drivers of a dairy company in Maine fell into an overtime exemption under the state’s . . . [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.

TRAVAIL : Les questions posées à l’entrevue de sélection d’une candidate, lesquelles portaient sur son âge, le nombre d’enfants qu’elle avait et sa grossesse, sont discriminatoires; toutefois, le refus de l’embaucher ne l’est pas puisque la décision de l’employeur n’a aucun lien avec les réponses données.

Intitulé : Commission des . . . [more]

The jurisdiction in which it makes the most sense to reform copyright law so that it supports, rather than deters, access to research and scholarship is the United States. After all, the country’s Constitution empowers Congress “To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.” The only other thing the Constitution seeks to “promote” is the country’s “lasting Welfare.”

Yet U.S. copyright law today violates this constitutional imperative. The evidence that copyright law is not promoting the progress of science comes from . . . [more]