Pulse
-
June 16, 2025
The Friendly Bar series, No. 1: Do not define a lawyer by one case
In the legal profession, it is all too common for lasting impressions of a colleague to be formed based on a single file or interaction. Whether it is a difficult case, a tense negotiation or an adversarial court conference, that one experience often comes to define a lawyer’s entire professional identity. Informal whispers such as “They are unreasonable” or “They are unprofessional — avoid them” circulate rapidly, ultimately hardening into a reputation that may be undeserved and unrepresentative.
-
June 16, 2025
I care very little about what you think of me
Don’t be distracted by criticism. Remember: the only taste of success some people have is when they take a bite out of you. — Zig Ziglar, American author and motivational speaker
-
June 16, 2025
Bill C-5: A legal feeding frenzy at the expense of Indigenous jurisdiction
The federal government’s proposed Bill C-5 — which includes the Building Canada Act — sets a two-year timeline for major project approvals. On the surface, it promises efficiency and economic momentum. But from the perspective of many Indigenous leaders and legal professionals, this legislation signals a looming crisis: the sidelining of Indigenous law, the erosion of meaningful consultation, and a surge of culturally incompetent legal advocacy that risks deepening colonial harm.
-
June 13, 2025
Supreme Court Kinamore ruling clarifies rules on sexual history in trials
A fair match in sports requires teams to confront each other on a level playing field. The analogy holds for the courtroom as well. Sexual offence trials in Canada have become increasingly complex, partly due to confusion surrounding the rules governing evidence of a complainant’s sexual history. These rules, designed to prevent reliance on discriminatory myths and protect complainants’ rights, have resulted in uncertainty and disruption during trials. In the recent case of R. v. Kinamore, 2025 SCC 19, Canada’s highest court sought to level the playing field.
-
June 13, 2025
Former Supreme Court Justice La Forest dies
Former Supreme Court Justice Gérard Vincent La Forest has died. Justice La Forest, whose long legal career also encompassed government work, private sector lawyering, teaching and sitting on an East Coast appeal court, died June 12, according to a news release. He was 99.
-
June 13, 2025
Christopher Johnson receives CBABC award for contributions to legal aid
The Canadian Bar Association, B.C. Branch (CBABC) has recognized criminal justice lawyer Christopher Johnson with the Georges A. Goyer, QC Memorial Award for Distinguished Service.
-
June 13, 2025
Kramer v. Kramer?
We are all familiar for example with the iconic 1932 House of Lords case of Donoghue v. Stevenson, where the court broke the ice on the law of negligence enabling the customer to successfully sue the manufacturer of a bottle of ginger beer that contained a non-invited snail. AI will generally give you a decent summary of the case. But what might happen if in our search we throw in some random word, like say “Seinfeld”?
-
June 13, 2025
Injury law in the digital age: Embracing new tools and technologies
From wearable devices that track health in real-time to AI summarizing dense legal contracts in plain language, injury law is being transformed by technology. Courts increasingly admit digital evidence, meaning injury law faces unprecedented opportunities and ethical pitfalls. As a result, lawyers who fail to adapt risk leaving clients at a disadvantage.
-
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
Supreme Court to decide if Facebook broke privacy law in disclosing users’ data to third-party apps
The Supreme Court of Canada has agreed to hear Facebook’s appeal from a lower court’s ruling that the platform shared users’ personal information with third-party applications on its platform, without providing adequate privacy safeguards or obtaining meaningful consent to disclose users’ personal data — in breach of the federal Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA).