By: Owen Pennock
In R. v. K.J.M., three justices of the Alberta Court of Appeal came to three very different conclusions on the application of the R. v. Jordan framework for delay in cases involving young offenders. Because of the disparate nature of these judgments, it remains unclear whether the presumpti...
By: Jianna Rieder*
The Supreme Court of Canada introduced a new framework to determine the reasonableness of trial delays in R. v. Jordan . While the intent behind the change was to improve the accessibility of justice by preventing unnecessarily drawn-out trials, the decision was criticized by Justice Bycho...
Privacy Rights vs. Technological Advances: A Case Comment on R. v. Jarvis and What It Means for The Future of Privacy
By: Nicole C. Krupski*
This comment discusses the Supreme Court of Canada's recent decision in R. v. Jarvis, a case involving a charge of voyeurism against a teacher making secret visual recordings of his students. Drawing on s. 8 Charter jurisprudence, the Supreme Court majority expanded Canadians' priv...
Legal Services Supply Gap in Saskatchewan: Temporarily Offering Tax Incentives to Lawyers for Providing Pro Bono Services
By: Jelaina Germain*
This comment focuses on the gap in the provision of legal services . The recommendations of the Legal Services Task Team should help increase access to justice in Saskatchewan but may take some time to implement. One possible temporary solution in the interim is to offer tax incentives to lawyers of...
By: Drea Nasager*
This comment explores the decision of the Yukon Court of Appeal in Mega Reporting Inc. v. Yukon (Government of) to uphold a waiver of liability in the Yukon Territorial Government procurement process.
By: Stephanie Nemeth*
This comment explores the crisis of mental health in the legal profession. The worrying incidence of lawyers suffering mental health issues affects the profession as a whole, particularly due to the connection between mental health problems and disciplinary complaints. A multi-faceted and multi-orga...
By: Fraser Duncan*
A 2018 complaint to the Saskatchewan Information and Privacy Commissioner (IPC) about a data breach within the provincial NDP highlights the gap in privacy protection in relation to political parties in most of Canada. This comment briefly explores the complaint and the IPC's response to it before a...
By: Shay Brehm*
This comment discusses Chagnon v. SFPQ and whether parliamentary privilege protects legislatures from claims of unjust dismissal.
By: Matthew Scott*
The Supreme Court of Canada exercises complete discretion in deciding which cases it does and does not hear. When dismissing applications for leave to appeal, the Supreme Court does not provide reasons. This lack of reasons is grounds for criticism of the Court’s transparency, legitimacy, and leads ...
By: Michael Marschal*
This comment explores R. v. Comeau. Although the Supreme Court of Canada’s articulation of the law regarding s. 121 of the Constitution Act, 1867 was persuasive, well-reasoned, and consistent with modern federalism jurisprudence, its application was shallow and overly deferential.
By: Zoe Johansen-Hill*
This comment discusses R. v. Stephan and the limits criminal law places on parental decision-making
Serving Public Opinion Not Justice: Should We Care About Politicians’ Increasing Penchant For Section 33?
By: Larissa Meredith-Flister*
This comment discusses recent events surrounding the use or contemplation of use of the notwithstanding clause in Canada and its implications for civil rights.
By: Thomas Laval Fransoo*
This comment will build off the work of prior writers on the issue of electronic wills by first discussing the urgent need for electronic wills in our digital age and then consider how blockchain technology could help this cause.
By: Katherine Starks*
This comment looks at two recent trial decisions that declared the federal administrative segregation regime unconstitutional and seeks to clarify how the trial decisions dealt with one key issue: does the Charter require firm time limits on the duration of solitary confinement?
By: Alex J. Laird*
This comment focuses on the Canadian Anti-Spam Legislation. It provides an overview of the history of the Act, the first public decision from the CRTC addressing CASL violations, and the uncertainty that continues to persist.
By: Jeremy Barber*
This comment envisions blockchain for the future of legal citation. The author describes blockchain as a potential mechanism to overcome the distrust for electronic case reporters as an authoritative source in legal scholarship.
By: Erica Klassen*
This comment considers the Supreme Court of Canada's interpretation of s. 8 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in the context of text messages stored on another person’s cell phone.
By: Brad Smith*
In a series of recent cases, the Ontario Court of Appeal overturned decisions of the Ontario Review Board, leading to the absolute discharge of an accused found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder. These cases, starting with Re Wall, highlight the need for review boards to estab...
By: Adam Unick*
This comment offers a brief comparative analysis of the interplay between taxation law and secured financing in Canada and the United States. It argues that, although uniformity is a worthy value in commercial law, uniformity for its own sake should not be viewed as a desirable justification for cha...
By: Aaron Fritzler*
This comment explores the courts’ long-standing tradition of referencing the ordinary person when interpreting the word “accident” in insurance contracts.
R. v. Tatton: The Supreme Court of Canada Doubling Down on the Dichotomy Between Specific and General Intent for the Defence of Intoxication
By: Michael Marschal*
This comment discusses the approach taken by the Supreme Court of Canada when assessing the mens rea of intoxicated defendants in the criminal justice system.
By: Jianna Rieder*
This comment discusses the risk of using joint tenancy as an estate planning tool considering the recent Saskatchewan Court of Appeal decision, Dunnison Estate.
By: Aden Ritter*
This comment discusses the phenomenon of litigation seeking the joint sharing of family dogs following a breakdown in a relationship and how the Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench has dealt with this unique issue.