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) : On ne peut conclure à l’inapplicabilité de l’article 162.1 (2) a) C.Cr. à l’égoportrait de la victime au seul motif que l’on n’y voit pas son corps entièrement dénudé; la question est de savoir si la victime est suffisamment dévêtue pour pouvoir la considérer comme «nue» au . . . [more]

A considerable amount of Canadian legal scholarship exists within the boundaries of either civil or criminal law. Each camp generally invites separate consideration of gaps, standards, trends, shifts, and other issues. Rarely do these two domains of scholarship meet. A similar divide is apparent in legal practice, with the civil and criminal legal systems commonly viewed as separate arms within our broader legal machinery. There are certainly valid reasons for the siloing of these bodies of law. For those trained in law, the divide between civil and criminal law and the reasons for it will be clear, logical, and in . . . [more]

Can the Alberta Privacy and Information Commissioner limit a foreign corporation from collecting images of Albertans for use in facial recognition software? That was the issue that came to the Court of Kings Bench of Alberta on the application by Clearview AI Inc. (“Clearview”) for judicial review of the decision of the Alberta Privacy and Information Commissioner.

Clearview obtains images of Albertans and Canadians by scraping publicly available data from web pages and social media sites on the internet. The privacy commissions of Alberta, British Columbia, Quebec, and Canada investigated Clearview’s practice of scraping images from the internet. A joint . . . [more]

This submission is part of a column swap with the American Association of Law Libraries (AALL) bimonthly member magazine, AALL Spectrum. Published six times a year, AALL Spectrum is designed to further professional development and education within the legal information industry. Slaw and the AALL Spectrum board have agreed to hand-select several columns each year as part of this exchange. 

Practical applications of generative AI in legal research.

“How do you use generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) for legal research?” The question usually surfaces in the context of continuing legal education presentations. The answer for most law librarians is, “I . . . [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 : Une conductrice ayant heurté 3 piétons en descendant une rue à reculons et à contresens est déclarée coupable sous 3 chefs d’accusation de négligence criminelle causant des lésions corporelles; l’analyse de l’ensemble de la preuve permet d’inférer que l’incident découle d’un geste intentionnel, et non d’une prétendue défaillance . . . [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.

Wrongfully Convicted: Guilty Pleas, Imagined Crimes, and What Canada Must Do to Safeguard Justice. By Kent Roach. Toronto: Simon & Schuster, 2023. xxxvii, 359 p. Includes bibliographic references and index. ISBN 9781668023662 (hardcover) $34.99; ISBN 9781668023679 (softcover) $24.99; ISBN 9781668023686 (eBook) $24.99.

Reviewed by Leslie Taylor
Research and Instruction Librarian . . . [more]

This month’s column is aimed at Gen-Xers like me and the Boomers who preceded us in the legal profession. Readers in your 20s, 30s, and 40s – I’ll catch you next time out.

Preparing a talk the other day, I realized with a mild shock that last month, I celebrated the 30th anniversary of my call to the bar. Although maybe “celebrated” isn’t quite the right word – “commemorated”? “Glossed over with mild discomfort?” “How the hell did that happen?” 1995 was also the last year in which I engaged in anything like the practice of law, so I suppose . . . [more]

Mediation has become a cornerstone of Canada’s civil justice system. Whether driven by mandatory programs or chosen voluntarily, it offers parties an efficient, relationship-focused path to resolution. And with the Ontario Civil Rules Review poised to expand its role, mediation’s prominence is only set to grow.

I am still surprised when I am retained as a mediator by counsel who I have never worked with in the past nor even spoken to. While I am happy to have the opportunity, it concerns me and raises a crucial question: how are mediators being selected? Are lawyers choosing mediators based on their . . . [more]

While many in the justice sector are confused and ambivalent about artificial intelligence, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal has taken a clear stand. CHRT “tribunal members,” as announced in a Practice Direction last fall, ”do not use AI to write decisions or analyze evidence.”

To understand why the CHRT (and some other Canadian tribunals and courts) have explicitly banned AI in adjudication, read the work of Prof. Amy Salyzyn. The “corrosive risks” she identifies include hallucinated cases, biased language, and subtle (and not-so-subtle) legal errors. Then there’s the issue of litigants’ confidential data being provided to AI companies through queries . . . [more]

This week, the BC government rammed through two controversial bills aimed at fast-tracking project approvals: Bill 14, Renewable Energy Projects (Streamlined Permitting) Act, and Bill 15, Infrastructure Projects Act. They appear to be intended as a response to US tariffs, economic uncertainty and affordability concerns: Adrian Dix, Minister of Energy and Climate Solutions, cited “this period of global market uncertainty” in a statement accompanying Bill 14, while Premier David Eby referred to this “time of uncertainty caused by Donald Trump’s tariffs” in the public announcement of Bill 15.

But instead of providing greater certainty and improving . . . [more]