This week's summaries concern: Concurrent sentences / Provocation as a defence / Disability and mandatory minimums:

The Defendant in a US patent litigation matter (Aker Biomarine AS, (“Aker”)) recently fell short of meeting the threshold requirements for obtaining permission to conduct a deposition and obtain documents from third parties in Quebec (the University of Sherbrooke and a Quebec Research Center). The US Plaintiff/patentee Neptune Technologies & Bioressources Inc. (“Neptune”) successfully opposed the overly broad Letters Rogatory Request. This recent case provides a clear illustration for US clients of what can easily go wrong when LR Requests are not initially vetted by Canadian counsel – before the US court issues the LR. In a broader context, this . . . [more]

Lawyers are frequently asked to predict the outcome of litigation.

Predictions are important in many other fields such as economics, politics, the weather and earthquakes.

The future performances of employees and athletes are regularly the subject of prediction. Predicting the performance and character of persons is very difficult. Lee Kuan Yew as Prime Minister of Singapore when discussing the appointment of ministers stated “despite all the psychological tests, we could never accurately assess character, temperament, and motivation”. See Lee Kuan Yew: The Grand Master’s Insights ….. by Allison and Blackwill (2012).

In the field of politics the polls sometimes fail . . . [more]

Right up there with breathing, drinking, eating and that other thing, there’s a basic human need to make sense — and to name it after yourself. I mean, the world’s a confusing place in which the occasional region of regularity can give you the break you need to recover your equanimity. And what better name to give to this “happy place” of order than your own? Yes, it’s definitely a win-win, as they say when you break the tape-tape.

Which explains why it’s been done a whole lot for all fields in which “law” is a useful descriptor. Order, regularity, . . . [more]

“I know lawyers who are very innovative and lawyers with very traditional practices. The latter seem to make much more money,” says Noel Semple, a self-described “lapsed lawyer and aspiring professor.”

And there, in a nutshell, appear two of the biggest impediments to innovation in the legal field: the idea that if it ain’t broke, it doesn’t need fixing, combined with the real possibility that the innovation will fail – or at the very least, that the innovator will be scrambling for money until the idea catches on.

Innovations in the legal sector – and the impediments thereto – were . . . [more]

The October 2013 issue of Connected is available online. The bulletin covers news about the impact of new social media on courts.

Most issues cover news from the United States, but there is occasional coverage of other jurisdictions.

In this issue:

• Courts and QR Codes
• Justices from 12 midwest states consider implications of evolving technology on the courts
• Australia’s Supreme Court of Victoria launches new social media initiative
• Ohio explores haunted courthouses across the state

The bulletin is published by the Virginia-based National Center for State Courts (NCSC) and the Conference of Court Public Information Officers. . . . [more]

The day after the federal government identified genetic discrimination as a priority in its speech from the throne on October 16, 2013, Senator James S. Cowan re-introduced Bill S-201, An Act to prohibit and prevent genetic discrimination in the Senate.

One way of stimulating justice innovation is to organise a competition. As I write, the 2013 HiiL – Innovation Justice Awards and the Human Rights Tulip are open for pubic online voting for one more week (see http://www.innovatingjustice.com/awards). By the time this column is published the jury will be deliberating about the winners and on 11 December we will have the award ceremony. This is the third time the HiiL – Justice Innovating Justice Award has been awarded. And each consecutive year a growing number of fantastic initiatives and ideas that strengthen justice delivery reach innovatingjustice.com, with an extra . . . [more]

Each Thursday we present a significant excerpt, usually from a recently published book or journal article. In every case the proper permissions have been obtained. If you are a publisher who would like to participate in this feature, please let us know via the site’s contact form.

The Marble and The Sculptor: From Law School To Law Practice
Keith Lee
Chicago: ABA, 2013

Five Basic Mistakes to Avoid in Your First Job at a Firm

1. Rule #1. Also referred to by seasoned attorneys and judges as “key witness Mr. Green.” Always make sure you get paid.

For someone at . . . [more]

…and a love-in for Roy McMurtry

The Osgoode Society held its annual book launch last Wednesday at Osgoode Hall. The event was a stellar occasion, with many celebrity authors and guests in attendance and four choice titles to applaud. Authors Charlotte Gray and Roy McMurtry in particular helped draw a record crowd that included among many notable jurists, Aharon Barak, a former chief justice of Israel, and Rosalie Abella, a justice of the Supreme Court of Canada and the leading cheerleader for legal research and writing in Canada.

McMurtry himself was the object of a virtual “love-in” as long time . . . [more]

Every once in a while you come across a lawyer or other professional who has such a bad presence that you question whether they are real or competent. It is often because they do some basic image affecting things horribly wrong.

Here are a few things needed to leave a good impression, are often done wrong, and yet cost little or nothing to do right:

• Have a web site. It doesn’t have to be fancy, but needs to include basic info like what you do, where you are, and how to contact you. It also needs to look professional. Blog

. . . [more]

Skype is now as ubiquitous as ICQ once was. We have family in Calgary and we regularly connect to them from Montreal using Skype. Using laptops at both ends, the software is simple and making the connection is a snap. Sure, the picture is grainy and frames are dropped: so what? It costs nothing.

Enter the world of courts, tribunals and commissions. The question is bound to be asked: why can’t we allow witness so and so to appear remotely using Skype or a similar program? If you think this reasoning simplistic, think again, as evidenced by the George Zimmerman . . . [more]