Comments

A Saskatchewan Contribution to Enduring Inconsistencies in Bail Law

The inconsistent application of bail law across provinces and territories has resulted in increased guidance from the Supreme Court of Canada, most recently in the decision of R v Zora, which focuses on appropriate conditions of pre-trial release. Since bail law is largely conducted at the trial level, the effect of this guidance must be measured within the provincial, territorial, and superior courts. In Saskatchewan, the post-Zora decision of R v Raheem-Cummings suggests that the province continues to contribute to an inconsistent approach to bail law in Canada.

Taylor v Newfoundland and Labrador: Mobility Rights in the Age of a Global Pandemic

In Taylor v Newfoundland and Labrador, the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador ruled on the novel issue of whether provincial governments have the legislative power to restrict domestic travel across their borders. This decision provides a starting point for determining the constitutionality of such government measures in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and for determining at what point protecting public health justifies restrictions on individual rights.

Pandora’s Box: Litigation and Regulation of Videogame Loot Boxes

Videogame loot boxes, randomized packages of in-game items purchased with real or virtual currency, are a growing source of litigation and legislation around the world, including a recent Canadian lawsuit against a major videogame publisher. Loot boxes’ similarities to gambling have been noted by numerous psychological studies and have already led some European nations to sweep them into the embrace of existing gambling statutes. Their legal situation in Canada is much less clear, though lawsuits like these have the potential to force industry regulators into action.

Canadian Pacific Railway Company v Kelly Panteluk Construction Ltd.: Narrow Clarifications and Broad Baseline Setting

Canadian Pacific Railway Company v Kelly Panteluk Construction Ltd. was handed down at a transitional moment in the landscape of construction law in Saskatchewan. The decision will also serve as a legal baseline going forward into the incoming prompt payment regime, as it clarifies elements of procedure and application of the statutory holdback and trust provisions of The Builders’ Lien Act.

Mixed Messaging? Intimate Partner Violence Sentencing Amendments to the Criminal Code

This comment discusses recent amendments to the Criminal Code that added new intimate partner violence sentencing provisions, which came into force through An Act to amend the Criminal Code, the Youth Criminal Justice Act and other Acts and to make consequential amendments to other Acts. The Department of Justice described the purpose of the amendments as being “to toughen the criminal law response to domestic assault.” However, recent jurisprudence illustrates how these new measures appear to conflict with existing sentencing principles, particularly with respect to joint submissions and Indigenous offenders.

No Longer Up to You: How Will Your Investments Be Taxed?

In MacDonald v Canada, the Supreme Court of Canada clarified the test for distinguishing between investments meant to speculate, which are taxed on income account, and those meant to hedge, which are taxed on capital account. The Supreme Court’s decision diminishes the importance of the investor’s subjective intent, which elevates the risk that an investor might become an “accidental hedger” and end up with a higher tax bill than they anticipated or intended.

1688782 Ontario Inc. v Maple Leaf Foods Inc.: Limiting Duty of Care in Cases of Pure Economic Loss

This comment discusses 1688782 Ontario Inc. v Maple Leaf Foods Inc., a Supreme Court of Canada five to four ruling released on November 6, 2020. While denying that the supplier owed a duty of care to the franchisee, the Court revised and clarified several areas of pure economic loss in negligence law.

Catching the Middleman: Amendments to Money Laundering Provisions of the Criminal Code

A recent Criminal Code amendment may drastically change how money laundering will be investigated and prosecuted in Canada. Now, when concealing or converting funds, rather than being required to know the property in question is the proceeds of crime, one only needs to be reckless as to the origin of the property to be found guilty of money laundering. This opens up the possibility that countless financial intermediaries—including lawyers, accountants, and bankers—may be prosecuted.

Limitation Periods, Payment for Extras, and Construction Litigation: A Comment on Saskatchewan (Highways and Infrastructure) v Venture Construction Inc.

In a dispute surrounding a construction contract containing a “payment for extras” clause, does a contractor’s loss occur when they do the extra work, or when they are denied compensation? This question has crucial implications with respect to limitation periods, and the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal recently weighed in with an unintuitive, but helpful answer.

The Persistent Jurisprudential Muddle: Determining the Standard of Review for Procedural Fairness in Saskatchewan

What is the standard of review for procedural fairness? Strong jurisprudence from the Federal Courts suggest that the standard of review for procedural fairness remains uncertain. The Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan has indicated its preference for the side of “correctness.” Nevertheless, the issue remains far from resolved in Saskatchewan.

R. v Poulin: Muddled adjudication; adjudication, nonetheless

In this blog post, a brief analysis of the Supreme Court of Canada’s recent R. v Poulin decision brings forward concerns of what appears to be incomplete and inconsistent reasoning processes in both the majority and dissenting reasons. These concerns arguably impugned the Court’s efficacy in fulfilling its duty to bring clarity to the law in this instance. If left unaddressed, these concerns may also compromise the Court’s ongoing functionality as Canada’s top legal educator.

The Implications of Using a Standard of Reasonableness versus Correctness: A Case Comment on Pomarenski v. Saskatchewan Veterinary Medical Association

This comment discusses the implications of a remark made by the Court of Queen’s Bench for Saskatchewan in Pomarenski v. Saskatchewan Veterinary Medical Association Professional Conduct Committee, in which a disciplinary decision of the Saskatchewan Veterinary Medical Association was substantively reviewed. This comment also discusses how the Supreme Court of Canada’s recent decision in Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Vavilov, which significantly alters the standard of review framework, will impact decisions such as Pomarenski.

New Anti-Money Laundering Legislation: Why is Alberta so Slow on the Uptake?

This comment discusses an agreement by Canada’s finance ministers to amend their respective corporate statutes to reflect a need for transparency within closely held corporations. British Columbia, Manitoba, and Saskatchewan have all moved forward to implement the agreement within their jurisdictions. However, a recent report out of British Columbia has named Alberta as the region with the highest estimated amount of money laundered through it. What is Alberta doing in light of this finding, and what are the possible implications of their inaction?

Feng v. Saskatchewan (Economy): Denying a remedy for a breach of procedural fairness in the Saskatchewan Immigrant Nominee Program context

On January 9, 2020, the Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan released its decision in Feng v. Saskatchewan (Economy). This comment discusses the Court’s decision to deny a remedy despite finding a breach of procedural fairness and, more importantly, addresses the Ministry of the Economy’s concerning arguments.

Access to Legal Services, Limited Licences to Practice Law, and the Protection of the Public: A Discussion of Law Society of Saskatchewan v. Zielke and Recent Amendments to The Legal Profession Act, 1990

Law Society of Saskatchewan v. Zielke serves as an example of a law society acting to fulfill its statutory mandate to protect the public and regulate the provision of legal services. The case also raises questions with respect to access to legal services for those who require them most. This blog post will discuss Law Society of Saskatchewan v. Zielke as well as implications that recent amendments to The Legal Profession Act, 1990 and the Law Society of Saskatchewan Rules may have with respect to access to legal services in Saskatchewan.

R. v. Rafilovich: A Need for Legislative Amendment

This case comment discusses the Supreme Court of Canada’s recent decision in R. v. Rafilovich, a case involving an individual who was arrested with approximately $47,000 worth of cocaine and $42,000 in cash. The cash was seized as being proceeds of crime, but subsequently released back to Rafilovich in order for him to hire counsel. At trial, the money was proven to be proceeds of crime. However, as Rafilovich had used the funds to hire counsel, the issue became whether a fine should be imposed equalling the amount returned as it was proceeds of crime. The implications of the case, as well as whether there is a need for legislative amendments following the decision, are considered here.

The Constitutionality of Section 33.1: A Never-ending Story?

This comment explores recent Charter challenges to s. 33.1 of the Criminal Code, which precludes the defence of self-induced intoxication for general intent, bodily integrity offences. The disparate outcomes in cases from Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Ontario highlight the need for further appellate intervention to clarify the state of the law.

A Nation of Hollow Words: An Act respecting First Nations, Inuit and Métis children, youth and families

An Act respecting First Nations, Inuit and Metis children, youth and families has been held out by the federal government as ground-breaking legislation, co-developed with Indigenous groups. But “reconciliation is not what you say; it is what you do.”

R. v. A.M.: Striking a Balance Between the Protection of the Complainant and the Protection of the Charter Rights of an Accused in Sexual Assault Proceedings

This case commentary discusses the new process for admitting private records in sexual assault proceedings under the Criminal Code as examined in R. v. A.M., a recent decision from the Provincial Court of Saskatchewan, which declared parts of the new Code provisions invalid. These new provisions force the courts to balance the protection of a complainant’s private records in sexual assault proceedings with the rights of an accused in a criminal proceeding under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Presently, these provisions appear to tip the balance too far in favour of the complainant.

Private Companies in Saskatchewan Prisons: The Impact of the Increasing Cost Barrier for Accessing Inmate Telecommunications

This comment explores the impact of outsourcing inmate telecommunication services in Saskatchewan to a private company, GTL, which provides calling technology in correctional facilities. This technology has resulted in excessive pricing schemes for inmate calling and detrimental effects on inmate health and well-being.

Unnecessarily Uncertain: Roberts Properties and the Case for an Official Service Animal Registry

In the case of Roberts Properties Inc. v. O.S. , the Office of Residential Tenancies interpreted Saskatchewan’s Human Rights legislation and found that a woman’s support animal did not meet the requirements to be considered a “service animal,” and thus receive protection under the Act. As such, she was in breach of her tenancy agreement. The reasoning in that case reveals the inadequacies of Saskatchewan’s current approach (or lack thereof) of regulating service animals and shows the need for an official registration scheme for service animals in this province.

Are some political ideas simply too dangerous to express? An analysis of the constitutionality of the Canada Election Act’s restrictions on political speech

This comment discusses the constitutionality of the sections of the Canada Elections Act, as amended by the Elections Modernization Act, that restrict political speech considered to be false.

Mandatory Victim Surcharges and s. 7 of the Charter

In 2013, Parliament passed the Increasing Offenders’ Accountability for Victims Act, making victim surcharges mandatory for all individuals convicted of an offence under the Criminal Code or the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act. The constitutionality of this provision has been challenged in many jurisdictions, with the Supreme Court of Canada finally ruling it to be unconstitutional under s. 12 of the Charter in R. v. Boudreault. The constitutionality of this amendment under s. 7 as well as the effects of this Act are considered here.

Orphan Well: Embracing statutory ambiguity

This case comment scrutinizes the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in Orphan Well Association v. Grant Thorton Ltd. Many Canadians will be happy with the results of the case. However, the Supreme Court’s reasoning lacks coherence and provides little direction to lower courts tasked with reviewing ambiguous legislation.