The Court of Justice of the EU has held that the “examination script” i.e. the answers to examination questions, constitutes the personal information of the student, and therefore it must be made available to the student on request under access to information and privacy laws. (This is the Nowak case out of Ireland, for those of you who follow such things.)

Would the same result be obtained in any Canadian jurisdiction? One understands the argument that the answers are connected to the student – they have to be, in order to serve their primary purpose. The student’s marks would be . . . [more]

Crossing the American border with electronic devices has long been a concern for both the public and lawyers in Canada. Border officials have always had more power to inspect or search electronic devices than domestic police, but this has also raised some concerns for American citizens as well.

While the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), does not apply to data stored on a personal device, this information is still protected in the U.S. under the Fourth Amendment. The notable exceptions to this include search incident to arrest and border searches. The Supreme Court of the United States has justified this . . . [more]

Alongside the traditional forms of registerable intellectual property managed by intellectual property offices, patents, trademarks, copyright and industrial designs (and integrated circuit topographies), one of the most valuable forms of intellectual property for many businesses is trade secrets.

Trade secrets encompass almost anything of a confidential nature that can provide a competitive advantage. Trade secrets include know how, processes, customer/supplier lists, formulas, processes and methods. Trade secrets are not registered with any government authorities but can be maintained indefinitely.

To be preserved, trade secrets have to be kept confidential, This is typically done through a combination of physical, technological and . . . [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.

CONSTITUTIONNEL (DROIT) : Les appelantes échouent dans leur tentative de contester la validité constitutionnelle des articles 51, 52 et 58 de la Charte de la langue française, portant sur la langue du commerce et des affaires.

Intitulé : 156158 Canada inc. c. Attorney General of Quebec, 2017 QCCA 2055 . . . [more]

Last summer, York University declared that it will appeal the July 12, 2017 ruling of the Federal Court of Canada that was made in favor of Access Copyright, whose tariff on course materials, approved by Copyright Board of Canada, the university refused to pay. Instead of paying a set fee per student, York had relied on its interpretation of fair dealing to guide its faculty’s use of course readings. The court’s decision, delivered by Justice Michael L. Phelan, has been much commented upon, and I seek to add but a late footnote’s worth of further context as an educator and . . . [more]

Generally speaking, products we ingest like food, beverages, drugs and nutritional supplements are subject to basic regulations so we as consumers know what we are putting into our bodies. Things like ingredients, quantity, and source come to mind as basic information that should be available on packaging, or otherwise be readily discernable when interacting with these regulated products. Unfortunately, and to the detriment of consumers and producers alike, the legislation and administrative regimes in Canada that strive to ensure that food and beverage labeling and classification is intuitive and transparent remain works in progress. Shifting consumer demands and habits, developments . . . [more]

This column canvasses some recent developments in the law affecting electronic wills and reviews the Canadian position.

The forms an electronic will might take have been tested down under in recent years. Consider if the law anywhere in Canada would have, or should have, produced similar results.

Australia

In Yu, Re [2013] QSC 322, the High Court of Queensland gave probate to a will contained in the iPad of the deceased Mr. Yu, who had killed himself. The will was done up like a traditional will, i.e. with the heading ‘last will and testament’, and it contained many of the . . . [more]

There has been significant controversy in Ontario over the new Law Society requirement that every licensee “adopt and to abide by a statement of principles acknowledging their obligation to promote equality, diversity and inclusion generally, and in their behaviour towards colleagues, employees, clients and the public”.

The nature of the Statement of Principles controversy

Much of the controversy has focused on concern that the requirement compelled expressions of belief and accordingly raised the issue of freedom of speech. This was not an unreasonable concern for at least two reasons. As Alice Woolley pointed out in her op-ed column published in . . . [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. Maclean v. The Barking Frog, 2013 HRTO 630

[2] The facts of the case before me are relatively straightforward. The applicant is a young man who lives in London, Ontario. Late in the evening on September 6, 2012, he and some friends went to a local bar, The Barking Frog, and approached the doorman to inquire as to the cover charge. . . . [more]

2018 began with a bang in the Canadian cannabis industry.

After the markets closed this past Friday, January 12, 2018, CanniMed Therapeutics Inc. (“CanniMed”), announced that it had commenced a lawsuit against Aurora Cannabis Inc. (“Aurora”) and a number of large CanniMed shareholders.

In the announcement, CanniMed indicated that the claim was for $725 million in damages resulting from the defendants’ (alleged) “unlawful actions that have negatively affected the appreciation of the value of common shares of CanniMed and prevented CanniMed from pursuing alternative change of control transactions for the benefit of the CanniMed shareholders.”

While the press release contained . . . [more]