Access to Justice

  • June 13, 2025

    Alberta Court of Appeal tasked with measuring manageable vs. unmanageable risk

    We have all heard the phrase, “Lock him up and throw away the key.” The closest our Criminal Code comes to authorizing such a punishment is the designation of an offender as a dangerous offender. Challenging such a designation can be difficult, as one Albertan found in R. v. Bouvier, 2025 ABCA 202.

  • June 12, 2025

    N.B. legal aid needs to review eligibility criteria, formalize appeals process: auditor

    New Brunswick’s legal aid provider dropped the ball in failing to review its conditions for financial eligibility and for lacking a formal appeals process for those turned down, states a report from the province’s auditor general.

  • June 12, 2025

    Group urges Ontario to allow for restorative justice in sexual violence cases

    A global organization promoting alternatives to the criminal legal system for survivors of sexual violence is urging the Ontario government to change a policy that makes sexual violence cases ineligible for community justice programs.

  • June 12, 2025

    What happened to Madleen

    Israel controls Gaza’s borders by sea, land and air, except for the border with Egypt, where it still has indirect influence through a buffer zone and security co-ordination. Whether this level of control counts as occupation or violates international law isn’t something I’ll get into here.

  • June 12, 2025

    Reducing CRR burden: Keep ‘relevance’ as standard, reduce judge-presided conferences

    The Civil Rules Review Phase 2 (CRR) report mandates judicial case conferences in two forms: directions conferences and scheduling conferences. In addition, it proposes a completely new standard for productions while removing discovery, which is a cornerstone for ensuring necessary and adequate production. The CRR proposes a new production standard: production of “reliance” and “adverse” documents rather than keeping the current standard of relevance. The net result will be more ambiguity as to which documents are proper productions, and given the absence of discovery, a greater need to obtain full production of all “reliance” and all “adverse” documents.

  • June 12, 2025

    New Brunswick Appeal Court finds no reversible error in gun permit case

    How can our courts protect public safety by revoking a person’s firearms licence without discriminating against individuals with mental health issues? This became a significant focus in the New Brunswick Court of Appeal decision R. v. Wojcik, 2025 NBCA 46.

  • June 11, 2025

    Expanded Supreme Court registry services now available in Port Coquitlam, B.C.

    The province of British Columbia has announced that residents of its Tri-Cities region (which includes Port Coquitlam, Coquitlam and Port Moody) now have improved access to court services with the opening of a fully equipped Supreme Court registry at the Port Coquitlam courthouse.

  • June 11, 2025

    Judicial scarcity and Civil Rules Review: We can’t get there from here without more judges

    The Civil Rules Review Phase 2 (CRR) states: “There is consensus that the problem of access to timely and affordable civil justice has only gotten worse since Hryniak, particularly following the Supreme Court’s decision in R. v. Jordan” (Hryniak v. Mauldin, [2014] 1 S.C.R. 87; R. v. Jordan, [2016] 1 S.C.R. 631).

  • June 11, 2025

    Appeal Court stands by trial judge’s balance between probative value and prejudicial evidence

    It has been a 13-year ordeal for both the accused and the victim’s family. Unless there is a further appeal, Adam Picard will remain in prison. After being charged with first-degree murder in 2012, a court stayed the prosecution of Picard due to unreasonable delay in 2016 (R. v. Picard, 2016 ONSC 7061). That decision was overturned by the Ontario Court of Appeal (R. v. Picard, 2017 ONCA 692).

  • June 10, 2025

    Quebec ordered to pay $164 million for Charter breach in class action suit

    The Quebec government has been ordered by Superior Court to pay a staggering $164 million in compensatory damages, plus interest, for knowingly violating the rights of thousands of individuals who were arrested and illegally detained for a longer period of time than permitted by the Criminal Code prior to appearing before a justice of the peace.