The amendments to the Defamation Act passed in the UK earlier this year will come into force on January 1, 2014. There is a draft regulation on website owners’ liability for defamatory comments posted on their sites. There is quite a back-and-forth process.
Is a scheme like this a good idea for Canada? It is a kind of ‘notice and notice’ system, in which the original poster of the allegedly defamatory statements have to identify themselves (via the website operator) for litigation by the complainant, or the statements are deleted.
Here is Pinsent Mason’s description:
. . . [more][Website operators have
1. The Conceptual Foundation for the Use of Electronic Records
The concepts and arguments developed below have been facilitated by what I have learned from experts in electronic records management. The following three analogies should be the foundation concepts for all that is written and said about the discovery and admissibility of electronic records:
1. An electronic record (an e-record) is merely an electronic impression upon an electronic storage device, which is but a part of an electronic records management system (an ERMS). An e-record in its ERMS, is like a drop of water in a pool of water. Like . . . [more]
As I often do here on Slaw, I’m pointing you to the Google Doodle, which today is an animated game involving all the Doctor Whos from the 50 years of the show’s history — and, of course, an evil Dalek.
It’s worth it to let the Dalek vaporize a couple of Doctors just to hear the menacing growl, “Exterminate!” . . . [more]
It’s been a high profile fall for the Law Society of Upper Canada’s disciplinary system.
With the appeal decision in the notorious Groia case now on reserve, headlines on a different matter have moved to centre stage: a Law Society hearing panel has “exonerated” and “absolved” two Torys lawyers—Beth DeMerchant and Darren Sukonick—of conflict of interest allegations in relation to work done for the Hollinger Group of Companies. While the Law Society has expressed “disappointment” with the result, the cleared lawyers, for their part, are now seeking up to $4 million in costs and disbursements that they say were incurred . . . [more]
I’m a Dr. Who fan. I make this admission (probably an admission against interest) freely and with some pleasure, because “science fiction” — whatever that term might mean — was my introduction to books, libraries and the ecstasy of reading and reading and reading. Of course, when I grew up I “put away childish things” — Mrs. Hill, my grade ten English teacher, said I had to — but not until I’d taken Theodore Sturgeon, Arthur Clarke, Isaac Asimov, Robert Heinlein, Walter Miller, etc. etc. thoroughly on board. So no one was more pleased than I when the Beeb took . . . [more]
Upon reading one of today’s Slaw posts, How Technology Will Change the Practice of Law, it strikes me that many of the commentators place an extremely high value on technology as a driver of efficiency in legal work. In some cases, there’s almost a worship quality to their vision.
Don’t get me wrong, I think technology has a lot to offer. And admittedly, there is the occasional firm that is so backwards in its adoption that one can see how they are at a distinct disadvantage for not changing their ways. However, do we really believe that “technological efficiency” . . . [more]
The Law Society of Upper Canada has just now announced that Ryerson University and the University of Ottawa will provide the Society’s “Law Practice Program” of training for graduate JDs who choose not to, or are unable to, article. Ottawa will provide it in French and Ryerson in English. Unlike the University of Ottawa, Ryerson University has no law school.
As well, Ontario’s newest law school at Lakehead University will offer yet another alternative to articling, within its current JD program:
. . . [more]Additionally, the Law Society has approved another innovative option for fulfilling the experiential training component of its licensing requirements:
“It’s hard to take law and technology seriously when they still have a typewriter at the courthouse – and a pen remains the judge’s weapon of choice.”
That statement from Ottawa lawyer Bryan Delaney neatly sums up the paradox faced when talk turns to incorporating new technology into legal services – some may be riding technology’s cutting edge, but other parts of the profession are still tootling around in granddad’s jalopy.
Tuesday night’s CBA Legal Futures Twitterchat, hosted by My Legal Briefcase founder Monica Goyal, featured participants representing a full range of practitioners, from traditional to tech-based. There seemed to . . . [more]
In a stunning development, the Inquiry Committee charged with investigating the conduct of the Hon. Lori Douglas has resigned en masse (reasons here).
Associate Chief Justice Douglas was investigated by the Canadian Judicial Council in relation both to her conduct prior to her judicial appointment and to her disclosures during the appointment process. The Inquiry Committee was additionally charged with considering her conduct during the Canadian Judicial Council’s investigation, and in particular allegations that she interfered with the investigation.
The Inquiry Committee’s hearing has been fraught with problems. ACJ Douglas alleged that the Committee was biased, and after . . . [more]
You probably know that pro bono publico translates as “for the public good”. But you may not know that some justice system stakeholders view doing the public good as not much good at all. Generally lauded by judges and leaders of the profession, the long-term systemic value of pro bono legal service is a matter of limited but uneasy debate in the community of reformers, progressives and do-gooders dedicated to the concept of equal access to justice for everyone. Within that virtuous circle, not everyone is convinced of pro bono’s net benefit to the mission.
The typical knock against . . . [more]
This project has been made possible in part by the Government of Canada | Ce projet a été rendu possible en partie grâce au gouvernement du Canada