It is important for all persons working in the legal field to have an understanding of how this impacts on perpetual access to legal information from the federal government.

This email was sent to members of the infodep listserv (from the Depository Services Program) on July 8, 2013:

“The new Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat (TBS) Procedures for Publishing are now in effect. These procedures clarify the continuing role of Publishing and Depository Services during the Government of Canada’s transition to electronic publishing.

They apply to all departments listed in Schedules I, I.1 and II of the Financial Administration Act,

I’ve just received word of — and a copy of — McMillan’s first brochure featuring their pro bono legal services. You can access the announcement here and the brochure itself here.

This got me thinking a bit about the difficulty that you’d face in preparing such a brochure, for example:

• Who is your audience: partners in the firm? the general public? your charity partners? possible new hires? paying clients?
• How glossy do you make it: glossy (as this is), or does that seem too . . . incongruous? sober, like a simple list with the occasional paragraph in black

Introduction
 On May 21, 2013 Matt Maurer posted on SLAW noting that the Law Society of Upper Canada had decided that Ryan Manilla was of sufficiently good character to be admitted as a member, reversing its prior decision that he lacked such character (here).

In this post I place the Manilla decision in the context of the broader application of the good character requirement for Law Society admission and, in particular, in the context of the Federation of Law Societies’ recommendations for reforming that requirement ((National Admissions Standards Phase 1 Report). My comments reflect my . . . [more]

One of the important ways we serve British Columbia lawyers here at CLEBC is by keeping them informed about changes in the law, both large and small. We are always alert for information about new legislation. What’s happening and when? Our legal editors and program lawyers have wide networks throughout the legal profession so we can know very early whether changes are in the wind. This information is critically important to our work.

If a significant new legislative regime is being considered, our BC government tends to recruit an advisory committee to provide input on the new statute, rules, or . . . [more]

I am reporting today from a session at the American Association of Law Libraries 106th Annual Meeting. This morning I am attending a session on Business and Competitive Intelligence.

The session is a cooperative effort between AALL and the International Legal Technology Association. The AALL program app shares the intention of the session:

The session started with an overview survey, mainly answered by law librarians, to identify themes of how law libraries in firms supported BI and CI. The five major themes were:

.

Law Librarians shared stories of their BI and CI efforts. Firm library teams have created interesting . . . [more]

One participant on the cbafutures.org website noted that with their own law school tuition at $13,000 a year, the pool of applicants with the means to attend shrinks tremendously. Indeed, some new students will pay almost $30,000 in tuition in order to attend their first year of law school.

But so what? A lawyer is a lawyer is a lawyer, right? Everyone who goes to law school has the same education, and could conceivably serve the same constituency.

The question is really about the value of diversity. We’re used to thinking of diversity in terms of gender equality, and the . . . [more]

In Ontario, awarding costs (compensation for legal fees) is always within the discretion of the adjudicator. However, there is a presumption that the losing party will be ordered to pay a portion of the successful party’s legal costs.

Many people who are unfamiliar with the litigation process think that suing every possible party is usually a good idea. This strategy can backfire in a significant way in light of the “loser pays” system. In some instances a plaintiff may be successful at trial against one defendant, but lose against multiple other defendants who the plaintiff has named and, in the . . . [more]

Here are excerpts from the most recent tips on SlawTips, the site that each week offers up useful advice, short and to the point, on technology, research and practice.

Technology

Dan Pinnington

[No technology tip this week.]

Research

Acts Can Be Amended by Regulations
Shaunna Mireau

Oh legislation. How I love the odd and interesting and esoteric nature of delving into your secrets! Today’s Tip is a reminder that legislation passed by elected members can be amended by others if they are given the authority to do so. I have an example from Alberta . . .

Practice

Take . . . [more]

A recent decision of the Federal Court in Novartis v Teva 2013 FC 283 (“Novartis”) [under appeal A-123-13] has established that the relevant date for patent sufficiency is not until the publication date. Novartis may highlight an inconsistency in validity analysis. In some ways the notional “person skilled in the art” (who by definition is not inventive) is expected to know more, and earlier, than the inventors themselves (who are obviously inventive).

Narrowing of claims to one compound renders patent sufficient

In Novartis, Mr. Justice Hughes held that Novartis’ compound patent (CA 1,338,937[i]) was sufficient . . . [more]

As law firms tackle the new reality of the economy and the changes being demanded by corporate clients, they should look to those within the firms who are already well-versed in strategy for business change: librarians.

I am currently in Seattle at the American Association of Law Libraries annual conference, including the Private Law Libraries’ Summit on Saturday. The message we are hearing from a number of different perspectives is clear: lawyers would be advised to seek help in re-developing their firms so they are better positioned for competitive advantage, and librarians are well suited for the C suite, . . . [more]

Slaw has recently featured two great pieces from Simon Fodden and David Canton discussing PRISM and its privacy ramifications. Concerns over PRISM and what are sure to be other as-of-yet undisclosed government surveillance programs has left many wondering how they can “lock down” their data in the cloud.

While PRISM caused much gnashing of teeth about the security of the cloud in general, there are nine providers that provide data to the government under PRISM, as detailed by an NSA presentation released by the Washington Post:

• Microsoft
• Google
• Facebook
• Instagram
• Skype
• Twitter
• AOL
• Apple
• YouTube

The web searches we . . . [more]

Some time ago it was reported that a Spanish court had ordered Google to delete records of people’s private information on the ground that the applicable privacy laws gave them a ‘right to be forgotten’.

The Advocate General of the European Court of Justice published an opinion on this topic last month. In short, he opined that the EU Privacy Directive did not include a right to be forgotten, and that search engines did not control personal information in any event so were not subject to rules about handling personal information as ‘controllers’ under the Directive (or the national laws . . . [more]