In the Canadian legal press, England and Wales is often presented as something of a regulatory boogieman. We are continually warned that, if we don’t shape up, we will lose the ability to self-regulate, just like those poor English lawyers! An equally strong undercurrent of anxiety percolates around English forays into non-lawyer ownership of law firms. References to “floodgates” and “earthquakes” abound; our calm Canadian sensibilities are aflutter. For a population that so often asserts itself as “not-American”, it seems like a new rallying cry has taken hold for many in the legal profession: anything but England!

Often lost in . . . [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.

Reduction to Absurdity: Reasonable Expectations of Privacy and the Need for Digital Enlightenment
Jena McGill and Ian Kerr
Digital Enlightenment Yearbook 2012 199 J. Bus et al. (Eds.)
IOS Press, 2012

Excerpt: pp. 199-202

[Footnotes omitted. They are available in the full version via the link above.]

Introduction

For all but the tiniest . . . [more]

If you’re keen on law blogging, the way we are here at Slaw, you’ll be pleased to note that the recent changes to the Law Society of Upper Canada’s requirements for continuing professional development make it clear that bloggers can get CPD credit. This might give a little boost to those who might otherwise hesitate on the threshold.

The relevant change to the rules states:

. . . [more]

By the time this column is posted, UNCITRAL’s Working Group III, the group charged with the drafting of procedural rules for business-to-consumer online dispute resolution (ODR) services, will be meeting in New-York city for its 27^th session, the 6^th session dealing with the drafting of said rules (previous sessions dealt with transport and shipping legislation). Ourselves, and others (mainly John Gregory), have reported and commented on these rules on multiple prior occasions, but as time goes on, the major question surrounding said rules is less and less “what should they say”, and more and more “why bother”. At . . . [more]

Someone is conspicuously absent from the current debate about the future of legal practice. I have not yet noted anyone seriously asking clients the very relevant questions about what the profession should look like 10, 20 or 30 years from now.

This is not surprising given there is a great disconnect between legal professionals and most clients. That divide is evident whether looking at sophisticated corporate clients or the clients of any small or mid-sized law office.

I first became aware of the disconnect early in my career when I began work in the area of public legal education. At . . . [more]

The Whitney Museum of American Art in New York recently unveiled a simple, clever logo using a responsive “W”. A Wired article says “… the spindly zigzag design has been both praised for its modernity and criticized for its simplicity.”

Responsive design websites automatically adapt their configuration to the screen size you see it on. In the responsive W logo, the Museum changes the shape of the W to fit their use. To appreciate the cleverness and utility of this, look at the above video, the slideshow on the Wired article, and the designer’s explanation of the design.

As . . . [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 the week of November 28 to December 4th:

1. R. v. Ibanescu 2013 SCC 31
   

   [1] In R. v. Gibson, 2008 SCC 16 (CanLII), 2008 SCC 16, [2008] 1 S.C.R. 397, a majority of this Court — for the reasons of LeBel and Deschamps JJ. — held that straddle evidence is admissible to rebut the statutory presumption that the blood alcohol level of the accused exceeded the

Mark the commercial litigator was constantly writing down his bills because of his “leave no stone unturned” approach to research and preparation of his files.

Krista was always late with her time entry. She would hold off releasing it until the very last minute for fear of missing some small detail.

Trent has a desk piled high with filing because he is always waiting for the right time to tackle it all in one go.

What do Mark, Krista, and Trent have in common? They are all perfectionists.

I had a good discussion today about perfectionism with Derek LaCroix, QC, . . . [more]

The very first sentence of an article published some years ago in USA Today recently caught my attention: “Could three words change the way severely ill patients and their loved ones think about death?”.

The title of this article quickly gave the answer away “’Do not resuscitate’ vs. ‘allow natural death’”.

This article highlights not only how semantics can change a person’s reaction to a given situation (and potentially the ensuing consequences), but also the importance of using the right terms in the right context. As this article explains, while “allow natural death” may permit a family to better come . . . [more]

A lawyer in my office pointed out the Samples of Bodily Substances Regulations published in the Canada Gazette Part I (proposed regulations) on June 1, 2013. This proposed regulation was drafted as part of legislative reform that was required as part of the decision in R. v. Shoker. and the related Response to the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Shoker Act which was assented to in March of 2011. as the Regulatory Impact Analysis Statment points out:

This Act amends the probation, conditional sentence and peace bond provisions of the Criminal Code to provide explicit authority for

There’s some good stuff happening over on Osgoode Hall Law School’s IFLS blog, which is managed by the impressive Sonia Lawrence. I’m referring to a “roundtable” discussion about the recent Supreme Court of Canada case Quebec (Attorney General) v. A, 2013 SCC 5, otherwise known as Eric v. Lola. The old song says “whatever Lola wants, Lola gets” — but not this time. The majority of the court supported the exclusion of de facto spouses from the provisions of the Civil Code governing spousal support and division of property, making Québec (yet again) unique among the provinces. This, . . . [more]

A recent, and entertaining, decision of Justice Morgan demonstrates how sometimes the court must make decisions in the face of being presented with two compelling, competing, theories. It also demonstrates the fundamental legal principle that the Plaintiff has the onus of establishing its case on a balance of probabilities.

The Plaintiff is the owner and operator of a tomato processing plant and storage facility in Leamington, Ontario, the tomato capital of the country.

The Defendant is the creator of the “bag-in-box storage system”. The Defendant manufactures aseptic bags that line the inside of boxes that are designed to be used . . . [more]