Those of you who read The Court on the web, rather than in email or by RSS, may notice that we've made a slight but important change to our header: gone is the little house in the Wellington Street meadow. In place of the line drawing of the Supreme Court building you'll now see a […]
When issuing Anton Piller orders (an Anton Piller order is obtained ex parte, and allows the moving party to access the premises of the other party to gather documents or other evidence that the court fears may be destroyed if the search is not carried out), courts have always been sensitive to their extraordinary nature. […]
On July 13, 2006 the Supreme Court of Canada handed down a unanimous judgement in the criminal breach of trust (s. 122) case R v Boulanger, 2006 SCC 32, and entered an acquittal. The facts of the case were relatively simple: the accused was a police officer whose daughter was involved in a car accident. Mr. […]
When the Supreme Court of Canada decides a case, it can be hard to know who has won. All sides have declared victory since October's Robertson v Thompson Corp, 2006 SCC 43, a ruling handed down by Canada's top court. By a 5-4 split, the Court favoured freelance author Heather Robertson who sued The Globe and Mail […]
Editor's Note: This post is excerpted from the C.D. Howe Institute's 2006 Benefactor's Lecture. The Supreme Court of Canada's 4-3 decision in Chaoulli v Quebec, [2005] 1 SCR 791 [Chaoulli], striking down the impugned provisions in Quebec law (see Health Insurance Act, RSQ, c A-29, s. 15 and Hospital Insurance Act, RSQ, c A-28, s. 11) was truly a legal […]
Editor's Note: Professor Scott's article was written the day the Canadian Federal Government voted to recognize the Quebecois as a "nation" (for the Parliamentary debate that set out the motion, see Hansard). It considers the background and meaning of terms such as "nation," "state" and "Québécois" and the possible implications in international law of recognizing […]
In Isen v Simms, 2006 SCC 41, a judgment handed down on October 5th, 2006, we have the second unanimous decision written by Rothstein J. after his appointment to the SCC. Reading the decision evoked memories of boating injuries I sustained after reacting too slowly to the warning, "Prepare to jibe!"
The Court has two hearings scheduled for this week. On Tuesday, in Kraft Canada Inc v Euro Excellence Inc, the Court will deal with a copyright dispute between chocolate bar importers. On Wednesday the Court will consider whether a court should hear an appeal by a party who is in default of a Court order […]
"The first alternative is to perpetuate what RCAP calls a national embarrassment. The other alternative is for the public to pay twice. Neither is palatable public policy. In my view, Parliament cannot have intended an interpretation of s.90(1)(b) that creates such a Hobson's choice" (Justice Binnie, dissenting, para 149). In the recently released decision McDiarmid Lumber […]
[Ce billet fut initialement publié sur les blogues Slaw et Chaire de l'UDM en droit de la sécurité et des affaires électroniques. Il est republié içi avec la permission de l'auteur.] Mercredi, 13 décembre, j'ai réparé un manquement pour tout juriste canadien qui se respecte: je suis allé pour la première fois à la Cour […]