You’ll have to skip to about 3/4 of the way through this piece to find out why the title of this piece is what it is.

Once upon a time, but not so long ago, Canadian tort law contained a test for proof of factual causation in tort known as the material contribution (to injury) test. For those who might have forgotten, or never knew, that test seemed to have been affirmed, in Canadian tort law, by the Supreme Court in Athey v. Leonati [1996] 3 SCR 458, 1996 CanLII 183. A unanimous 7-member panel (Lamer C.J. . . . [more]

In the interest of full disclosure I begin this piece by confessing to being a “Senate Junkie,” as a dear friend described my interest recently. I began reading Senate Debates and committee proceedings when I was in Grade XI, at the North York Central Library and continued following the work of the Senate in great detail for more than 30 years, and, more generally in the last decade or so. Sadly, the current debate about the Senate is so ill-informed that I am mildly afraid that I will be disqualified on the ground of knowing what I’m talking about. Whether . . . [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.

Commercial Debt Collection in Canada: A Legal Handbook
David Franklin
Toronto: Canada Law Book, 2012

Preface

Familiarize yourself with all books of law and, for as long as you are a merchant, familiarize yourself with the Birka code. If you are familiar with the law, you will not be the victim of injustice

Here’s a sad bit of reading — seven paragraphs of an appellate judgment concerning children handed down by an excellent bench (Noah v. Bouchard, 2013 ONCA 383).

[1] The appellant Johnny Bouchard appeals from the order of the Superior Court of Justice dated April 5, 2012, dismissing the appellant’s claim for custody of the parties’ two children, Tyler (age 10) and Nicholas (age 8). The application judge ordered that the custody and access arrangements in existence at the time of trial pursuant to the earlier order of Judge MacKenzie of the Ontario Court of Justice should continue

One of the fears we often hear from business people and lawyers who are reluctant to put “final and binding” arbitration clauses in contracts is: “What if the arbitrator gets it wrong?”

The recent decision of the British Columbia Court of Appeal in Creston Moly Corp. v. Sattva Capital Corp., 2012 BCCA 329 (CanLII) offers an object lesson in how the courts may still be too eager to review arbitration decisions and may even get the result “wrong” in situations where the arbitrator actually “got it right”.

The case involved a dispute over the payment of a finder’s fee in . . . [more]

I had written previously about legislation to amend the Electronic Commerce Act to remove the exclusion on land transactions. The government’s bill to do so has now passed, as part of the budget legislation for 2013 (schedule 5).

The amendments will come into force on proclamation. The government has been talking and will continue to talk with stakeholders about measures that might be useful to ensure that the change does not increase the risks of real estate fraud. (If you have suggestions about such measures, feel free to mention them here.)

The Ontario Real Estate Association was enthusiastic about . . . [more]

Later this month, I’ll be speaking to a group of women on the topic of representing yourself in legal proceedings. The focus of my presentation will be on what you need to know and can expect from the courts if you’re choosing to represent yourself.

In preparing for that presentation, I’m on the lookout for comments from courts across the country on what is expected of the self-representing litigant and conversely, what won’t be tolerated from a self-representing litigant. For example, in the recent decision in Delichte v Rogers, 2013 MBQB 93 (CanLII), the Court plainly and strongly criticized . . . [more]

It’s a big week at the Supreme Court for our professional and personal communities. As most of us are already aware, tomorrow the SCC will hear arguments in the Bedford case and will ponder the criminality of certain acts related to sex work, namely communicating for the purposes of prostitution, being found in a common bawdy house and living off the avails of prostitution.

At the heart of the decision are questions of constitutionality, specifically whether these three Criminal Code provisions violate section 2 and 7 of the Charter. Both the Government of Ontario and the Government of Canada maintain . . . [more]

Much has been written about the NSA / Prism communications monitoring scandal over the last few days, including Simon’s recent post. Many things are unclear, and there are more questions than answers, but these things are clear to me.

Some people defend or trivialize it by saying that actual phone conversations and emails are not being monitored – just metadata. Metadata simply means data about data – it doesn’t mean that it is innocuous or public. The phone “just metadata” being tracked is equivalent to looking at one’s phone bill – numbers called, duration, etc. That definitely contains personal . . . [more]

With today’s release of The Future of Legal Services in Canada: Trends and Issues, the consultation phase of the CBA’s Legal Futures Initiative begins.

Trends and Issues puts data and insight from original research commissioned by the CBA into a single document meant to provide an overview of major challenges facing the profession. The report – and the questions it raises – form a starting point for discussions and further consultations with stakeholders in the legal services industry.

We’ve been showing you bits of those papers here, and on the interim Futures website, for the last seven weeks. If . . . [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. Blackshear v. Canada 2013 FC 590
   

   [1] Her Majesty the Queen in right of Alberta, the Minister of Justice and Solicitor General of Alberta and the Deputy Minister of Justice of Alberta (hereinafter referred to as the Alberta Crown) seek an order to strike the Second Amended Statement of Claim under Rule 221(1) of the Federal Courts Rules

Low interest rates are great if you are borrowing money, but not so great for an insurance company trying to make a profit. That might also be bad for you because it leads to higher rates. To understand why lower interest rates are bad for insurers, you need to know how these companies make a profit.

If you own a typical permanent life insurance policy (lifetime coverage) and did a straight present value calculation of the premiums you can expect to pay during your lifetime, the total will be less than the death benefit. If the insurer is not collecting . . . [more]