There is something incredibly human about the ability, and our tendency, to infer. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle once waxed and waned that our instinct to draw quick conclusions both defines and hinders the human intellect: “the quick inference, the subtle trap, the clever forecast of coming events, the triumphant vindication of bold theories—are these not […]
This guest post was contributed by James Steele. James Steele practices insurance, municipal, and commercial litigation with Robertson Stromberg LLP in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan. In Heritage Capital Corp. v. Equitable Trust, 2016 SCC 19 the Supreme Court offered two significant lessons to purchasers of Canadian heritage properties: Absent express statutory language, positive covenants in favour of developers will not run with the […]
Two recent decisions of the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) were the subject of significant media attention this past spring. R v Lloyd, 2016 SCC 13 [Lloyd] and R v Safarzadeh‑Markhali, 2016 SCC 14 [Safarzadeh] involved constitutional challenges to sentencing provisions and have been framed as directly dismantling the previous federal government’s “tough on crime” […]
"Canada has never come to terms with First Nations people and our special place within the fabric of this country." - Doug Cuthand The recent Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) decision in Musqueam Indian Band v. Musqueam Indian Band (Board of Review) 2016 SCC 36 (“Musqueam Indian Band”) represents a powerful pronouncement on the ability of […]
For centuries, the Métis and non-status Indian populations of Canada have been lost in a “jurisdictional wasteland.” Both the federal and provincial governments swayed between legislating over the two groups at certain times and denying all constitutional responsibility at others. Not only did this seesaw deprive Métis and non-status Indian people of essential programs and […]
The Court’s decision in KRJ this summer provides a new test for “punishment” under s 11(i) of the Charter. While the Supreme Court of Canada’s new test better reflects the goals of the guarantee, overall the case may have a problematic impact because of its treatment of s 1, which rests on an unclear standard […]