Author’s Note: After I wrote this column, but a couple of days before it was published, Open AI upgraded its GPT Chatbot from version 4 to version 5. Among the negative reactions to the change was a sense that ChatGPT-5’s artificial personality had becomes more distant and less complimentary. As you’ll see below, I don’t think that’s a problem. But there are early indications that Open AI might tweak the model again to reintroduce the earlier version’s “warmth,” which would make my warnings below more relevant again.

Something that many people have expressed concern about, when it comes to using . . . [more]

Looking forward to this upcoming conference hosted by my colleague Professor Shanthi Senthe! This conference is generously sponsored by the Don Rodzik family.

“Bridging Borders, Businesses and Global Connections”
September 5, 2025
Faculty of Law, University of Windsor

Free to attend.

Featuring:

Jan Scazighino- Consul, Senior Trade Commissioner -Consulate General of Canada, Detroit

Prof. Justin Onwenu- Director of Entrepreneurship and Economic Opportunity, City of Detroit, Mayor’s Office

Ryan Donally- President and CEO, Windsor Essex Chamber of Commerce

Prof. Chios Carmody- Director of Canada-US Law Institute, Associate Professor, University of Western Ontario Faculty of Law Deepti Panda- PhD Candidate, Queen’s University . . . [more]

The Copyright Act imposes liability for circumvention of technical protection measures (TPMs). Technical protection measures are defined in Section 41 of the Copyright Act as any effective technology, device or component that (a) controls access to a work; or (b) restricts the exercise of the exclusive rights of the copyright owner, such as reproducing or publishing the work. A person circumventing a TPM can be found liable, regardless of whether the circumvention is for an infringing or non-infringing purpose.

The liability for unauthorized access or circumvention of a TPM may be substantial. The Federal Court awarded over $ 12 million . . . [more]

Navigating the legal system is challenging for any self-represented litigant (SRL), but for victim-survivors of intimate partner violence (IPV) or family violence, it can also be deeply retraumatizing. Without a lawyer, SRLs are directly exposed to the adversarial nature of the court process, where abusers can continue harassing victim-survivors through aggressive and oppositional tactics. At least 40% of family law litigants self-represent, often because they earn too much to qualify for legal aid but not enough to sustain representation. Abusers exploit this financial vulnerability, hoping that financial hardship will force their victims to give in—particularly in custody and support disputes. . . . [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) Quant à la question de l’intention de l’accusé de prendre ses médicaments, le juge de première instance pouvait refuser de s’appuyer sur une preuve par ouï-dire pour prouver ces faits litigieux; par ailleurs, bien qu’il ait inversé le fardeau de preuve en concluant à l’application de l’article 672.64  . . . [more]

As humans, we tend to navigate the world through emotion: quietly, instinctively, and sometimes unconsciously. What are emotions, if not the very fabric of how we live in the world? They’re how we feel, of course, but are also how we communicate, often without even realizing it. They drive our decisions: in relationships, in politics and in marketplaces. They connect us to each other and shape how we understand ourselves. But emotions are also deeply personal. While our faces might betray a flicker of joy or sadness, only we know the full story; the nuanced reasons why we feel what . . . [more]

Each month, we tell you which three English-language cases and French-language cases have been the most viewed* on CanLII in the previous month and we give you a small sense of what the cases are about.

For this past month, the three most-consulted English-language decisions were:

1. R. v. McLeod, et al., 2025 ONSC 4319

[1] On June 18, 2018, members of the 2018 Championship Canadian World Junior Hockey Team (“the team”) were gathered in London, Ontario to celebrate their victory in the World Junior Hockey Tournament earlier that year. What occurred during the early morning hours of June . . . [more]

In recent months, there have been several reports of lawyers for the US Department of Justice facing employment consequences for what the US Attorney General describes as failures of zealous advocacy. While I cannot speak to the US context, it seems worthwhile and timely to reflect on the role of zealous (resolute) advocacy for Canadian lawyers, including government lawyers.[1] Here I synthesize what I think is a fair consensus view in the Canadian context and then add some important points on which there is less consensus.[2]

The Consensus

Yes, government lawyers, like all lawyers,[3] unquestionably have a . . . [more]

In the May 2025 edition of ADR Perspectives, Marco Abruzzi a med-arbitrator in Victoria, B.C., makes a strong case for Med-Arb as an Effective Mechanism for Resolving Wills & Estates Disputes, concluding,

Med-Arb presents a compelling solution for resolving estate disputes, offering an effective balance between the flexibility of mediation and the finality of arbitration. By increasing the chances that disputes are resolved efficiently, privately, and with minimal damage to family relationships, med-arb is an ideal method for estate conflict resolution. As estate disputes continue to grow in complexity and cost, Med-Arb should be considered as a potential alternative

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’inceste, il y a lieu de substituer à la peine de 14 ans d’emprisonnement infligée par le juge de première instance celle de 12 ans que réclamait la poursuite; le juge a utilisé ses recherches, en l’absence des parties et sans obtenir leurs observations, . . . [more]