Law Times reports this week that a disbarred lawyer will have a chance at a pardon for his criminal fraud convictions after a Federal Court judge ruled the Parole Board of Canada acted unreasonably in denying him one. Context, in this case, is everything.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau could be headed for a mess of problems because of a Supreme Court decision last year on assisted dying for the medically incurable. Carter v. Canada (Attorney General) came down in February 2015. That’s even before Trudeau came to power.
The Liberals’ talk of electoral reform has led to questions about the process to be followed before any such change is adopted. So far, the Trudeau government has opposed holding a referendum on any new proposal, while the Conservatives have declared one must be held to legitimate such an important change.
On a Wednesday evening in late September, I found myself among a motley crew of Ottawa lawyers. From seasoned big-firm litigators to sole practitioners fresh out of law school, the room at City Hall was packed. We had gathered for a training session on the basics of preparing refugee resettlement applications.
Do you defend traffic cases? Are you planning to challenge a parking ticket? If you or your clients drive in the City of Toronto, you may encounter serious inconvenience.
The recently reported decision of Bruff-Murphy v. Gunawardena, 2016 raises important issues concerning the use of civil jury trials and the role of partisan expert witnesses.
In the early days of 2016, it seems obligatory to opine on the hit Netflix documentary Making a Murderer. You either watched it or are now sick of friends talking about it. I don’t have the space here to weigh in on the various theories swirling around Steven Avery’s guilt or innocence. It’s clear that many things went wrong during Avery’s investigation and trial. However, I’d like to focus on how I think the show highlights the need for a rigorous process of post-conviction appellate review to ensure that if things do go wrong they’re capable of being fixed.
It is undisputed that the practice of breastfeeding must be promoted and protected. Since the ability to breastfeed is unique to the female gender, a woman who opts to breastfeed may be subjected to adverse treatment in a workplace, something her male colleague would never face. An employer’s failure or refusal to accommodate a nursing employee’s breastfeeding needs may give rise to a discrimination complaint.