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) : L’accusé a agi illégitimement en attendant quelque 13 mois avant de présenter sa requête de type Jordan (R. c. Jordan (C.S. Can., 2016-07-08), 2016 CSC 27, SOQUIJ AZ-51302609, 2016EXP-2173, J.E. 2016-1212, [2016] 1 R.C.S. 631), sapant ainsi toute possibilité de répondre au problème des délais; par . . . [more]

As a supplement to our Sunday Summary each month, Supreme Advocacy LLP in Ottawa presents Supreme One-Liners, a super-short descriptive guide to the most recent decisions at the Supreme Court of Canada. Supreme Advocacy LLP offers its more comprehensive weekly electronic newsletter, Supreme Advocacy Letter, summarizing all Appeals, Oral Judgments and Leaves to Appeal granted.

Appeal Judgments

Criminal Law: Material Benefit & Procuring
R. v. Kloubakov, 2025 SCC 25(41017)

Material benefit & procuring offences constitutional.

Criminal Law: Fitness to Stand Trial
R. v. Bharwani., 2025 SCC 26 (40781)

Accused fit to stand trial when he understands reality of . . . [more]

A revised first edition of the Canadian Open Access Legal (COAL) Citation Guide/Guide canadien de la référence juridique en accès libre (RJAL) is now available: https://canlii.ca/t/7nc6q

The guide’s editors have incorporated reader feedback and corrections into a revised edition. Some of the changes include moving the general rules to their own section and revising rules on citing regularly updated books, regulations, administrative decisions, and generative AI for greater clarity and increased consistency across the guide. Additions to the guide include guidance on creating a bibliography/table of authorities and on citing reports, dissertations, municipal by-laws, court materials, First Nations, Métis, and . . . [more]

The Canadian Patent Office has a procedure for the “re-examination” of a granted patent. However, this procedure is rarely used in Canada for several reasons. Less than half a dozen re-examinations are filed each year.

Anyone, including the owner of the patent may request re-examination on the basis of prior art, namely patents, patent applications and printed publications (see s. 48.1 of the Patent Act). The patent office forms a panel that determines whether the request raises “a substantial new question of patentability”.

If so, the patentee is notified and the patentee can respond to the request, including providing . . . [more]

Sometimes life requires us to take a break from work. Whether due to pregnancy, caring for family, one’s own medical needs, or a desire to take some time to regroup, many lawyers will need or want to take a leave from practice at some point in their careers.

While you can step away from practice, you cannot step away from your professional obligations. Fortunately, with some thought and planning, you can ensure you comply with your duties even when you’re out of office and not checking your work email.

This column outlines some (non-exhaustive) practical tips for lawyers on how . . . [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) : Dans une affaire d’enlèvement et de séquestration d’une adolescente, le juge de première instance a erré dans l’évaluation du caractère volontaire des déclarations obtenues de l’accusé durant un interrogatoire de plus de 15 heures et dont la portion la plus cruciale n’a pas été enregistrée par les . . . [more]

As a supplement to our Sunday Summary each month, Supreme Advocacy LLP in Ottawa presents Supreme One-Liners, a super-short descriptive guide to the most recent decisions at the Supreme Court of Canada. Supreme Advocacy LLP offers its more comprehensive weekly electronic newsletter, Supreme Advocacy Letter, summarizing all Appeals, Oral Judgments and Leaves to Appeal granted.

Appeal Judgment

Criminal Law: Youths Sentenced As Adults
R. v. I.M., 2025 SCC 23 (40868), and R. v. S.B., 2025 SCC 24 (40873)

Courts to consider “developmental age” in youth sentencing not just actual age.

Leaves to Appeal Granted

Contracts: Breach; Contributory . . . [more]

In previous columns, I have examined the evolving trajectory of AI regulation and warned of the precarious path ahead. Regrettably, I must now report that the regulation of artificial intelligence in North America has become a project stalled by political circumstance. In both Canada and the United States, efforts to establish comprehensive governance frameworks for AI have encountered untimely political disruption, legislative dissolution in Canada and executive reversals in the United States.

This confluence of events has left two of the world’s most influential jurisdictions without durable regulatory mechanisms to manage the profound legal, ethical, and societal risks posed by . . . [more]

All of us have seen the consequences of a family in distress. Whether through separation, divorce, or child protection, the family justice system profoundly shapes the lives of children—often without truly hearing them.

Too many young people describe feeling invisible, disempowered, and voiceless in the very processes meant to protect their best interests.

That’s why the Family Justice Innovation Lab (via its Youth Voices Initiative) and the Transform the Family Justice System Collaborative are working to find new approaches—by centring youth with lived experience at the heart of reform.

We are expanding our network of young people who have . . . [more]

It is normally frowned upon to suggest that experiences from the past might be indicators of outcomes in the future. The problem is that invariably to follow that line runs a significant risk of naivety, for want of understanding that history does indeed frequently repeat itself, and humans are inclined to repeat their own mistakes, as they search to replicate their successes from the past. It was, therefore, noteworthy that the global US-based law firm, Cleary Gottlieb, has acquired the small London-based AI-focused startup, Springbok AI, the latter described in The Lawyer as “a challenger to the Harvey . . . [more]

Abstract

Authored By: Professor Wissam Aoun, Associate Professor & Member of Windsor Law LTEC Lab and Caitlyn Massad, JD Candidate at Windsor Law

1. INTRODUCTION Pharmascience Inc. v. Janssen Inc.[1] is scheduled to be heard by the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) this coming October. In Pharmascience, the SCC will revisit the decades old prohibition against patenting of methods of medical treatment. The case revolves around a fact pattern common to several recent ‘skinny label’ cases.

URL
https://www.lteclab.com/post/physicians-as-infringers-putting-pharmascience-into-persepective . . . [more]