DOCSLIB.ORG

Mahmud Jamal, Partner, Litigation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Mahmud Jamal, Partner, Litigation Mahmud Jamal, Partner, Litigation Contact Information Bar Admission [email protected] Ontario, 1996 tel: 416.862.6764 Education Areas of Expertise Yale Law School, LL.M. (Fulbright Scholar) Class Actions McGill University, LL.B. and B.C.L. Competition/Antitrust University of Toronto, B.A. Litigation Office Language(s) Toronto English, French Biography Mahmud’s national litigation practice includes the defence of class actions, constitutional and administrative law, competition/antitrust, pension, tax and other regulatory litigation. He has argued fifteen appeals before the Supreme Court of Canada in many different fields and defended three class action merits trials. He has also argued trials and appeals at all levels of court in Ontario, Quebec, British Columbia, and New Brunswick, at the Federal Court and Federal Court of Appeal, and before federal and provincial administrative tribunals such as the Competition Tribunal and Financial Services Tribunal. He is a former law clerk to the late Mr. Justice Charles D. Gonthier of the Supreme Court of Canada and to Mr. Justice Melvin L. Rothman of the Quebec Court of Appeal. Notable Matters Greater Toronto Airports Authority before the Supreme Court of Canada to defend federal jurisdiction over aeronautics (2009, under reserve); in a judicial review to secure Pickering Airport lands (GTAA and Attorney General of Canada v. Berrywoods Farms (2006), 208 O.A.C. 82, 19 M.P.L.R. (4th) 293 (Ont. Div. Ct.)); resisting an injunction in connection with tender process: Airport Limousine Drivers Association v. Greater Toronto Airports Authority, [2005] O.J. 3510 (S.C.J.), lv. to appeal dismissed; in an appeal on the legality of airport rates and charges (Air Canada v. Greater Toronto Airports Authority (2000), 130 O.A.C. 81 (C.A.)); in a leading case on the constitutional applicability of provincial laws to airports (GTAA v. Mississauga (2000), 50 O.R. (3d) 641 (C.A.), lv. to appeal to S.C.C. dismissed). Dell Canada Inc. before the Supreme Court of Canada in a case dismissing a consumer class action in favour of arbitration: Dell v. Union des consommateurs, [2007] 2 S.C.R. 281 (Identified by Lexpert as the most important case affecting business from 2007 in its feature “Top 10 Business Cases of 2007”); and in a product liability class action (ongoing): Griffin v. Dell Canada Inc., 2009 CanLII 18222 (S.C.), appeal dismissed 2010 ONCA 29. Canadian Bankers Association in a provincial reference before the Quebec Court of Appeal to determine the constitutionality of federal securities legislation (ongoing). Amex Bank of Canada in two class action merits trials and appeals challenging the constitutional applicability of the Quebec Consumer Protection Act to federally chartered banks (ongoing). Imperial Tobacco before the New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench and Court of Appeal in challenging a contingency fee agreement concluded by the province's Attorney General. Dollar Financial Group, Inc. in motions, trials and appeals in Ontario and British Columbia involving the relationship between arbitration and class actions (ongoing). Mackinnon v. National Money Mart, 2009 BCCA 103 and Smith Estate v. National Money Mart Co., 2008 ONCA 746. Antitrust class actions on behalf of General Motors of Canada Limited (ongoing), NEC Corporation, and Lucite International. Tax litigation before the Federal Court, Federal Court of Appeal, and the Supreme Court of Canada: Canada (Minister of National Revenue) v. Welton Parent, [2006] F.C.J. 117 (F.C.) (Actuarial firm challenging requirements under the Income Tax Act); Placer Dome v. Ontario (Ministry of Finance), [2006] 1 S.C.R. 715, rev’g (2004), 190 O.A.C. 157 (C.A.) (taxation of hedging and financial derivatives under the Mining Tax Act); Rezek v. Canada, [2005] 3 C.T.C. 241 (Fed. C.A.) , lv. to S.C.C. dismissed (taxation of convertible hedging under Income Tax Act); and Gifford v. Canada, [2004] 1 S.C.R. 411 (interest deductibility). New Brunswick Forest Products Association in aboriginal rights and treaty litigation before the Supreme Court of Canada: R v. Sappier and Polchies; R. v. Gray, [2006] 2 S.C.R. 686; and R. v. Marshall; R. v. Bernard, [2005] 2 S.C.R. 220. Canadian Bar Association before the Supreme Court of Canada to protect solicitor­client privilege: Ontario v. Criminal Lawyers' Assn. (whether Mahmud Jamal, Partner, Litigation government must abrogate privilege to promote freedom of expression) (under reserve); Privacy Commissioner of Canada v. Blood Tribe Department of Health, [2008] 2 S.C.R. 574 (whether regulators can abrogate privilege) (identified by Lexpert as one of the “Top 10 Business Cases of 2008”); and Celanese Canada Inc. v. Murray Demolition Corp., [2006] 2 S.C.R. 189 (removal of counsel for abrogating privilege). Canadian Civil Liberties Association before the Supreme Court of Canada to protect fundamental civil liberties such as freedom of religion and freedom of expression under the Charter: Alberta v. Hutterian Brethren of Wilson Colony, 2009 SCC 37; R. v. Bryan, [2007] S.C.R. 527; and Multani v. Commission scolaire Marguerite­Bourgeoys, [2006] 1 S.C.R. 256. Affiliations American Bar Association, Litigation and Antitrust Sections Canadian and Ontario Bar Associations Reviewable Matters and Private Actions Committee, Canadian Bar Association, Competition Law Section Advocates’ Society Industry Recognition Canadian Legal Lexpert Directory 2010: Litigation (Public) Best Lawyers in Canada 2011: Administrative and Public Law Lexpert’s Top 40 Lawyers Under 40 (2004) Publications/Events/Education Osgoode Hall Law School, Instructor (Administrative Law Remedies) and Director (Administrative Law LL.M. Program). McGill Law School (Comparative Constitutional Law), Former Lecturer. The Charter of Rights in Litigation (2 vols.), Canada Law Book, 2001+ (co­author). Recovering Unlawful Taxes After Kingstreet Investments, in Unjust Enrichment: Emerging Jurisprudence (ed. G. Radhika), 2008, pp. 181­195. Constitutional Issues In Canadian Competition Litigation (2004), 41 Can. Bus. L.J. 66­102. Pro Bono/Community Work Osler Pro Bono/Community Law Committee, Chair Canadian Civil Liberties Association, Member, Board of Directors Canadian Bar Association and Canadian Civil Liberties Association, Pro Bono Counsel .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Cv-12-9667-Oocl Ontario Superior Court of Justice Commercial List in the Matter of the Companies' Creditors Arra
    Court File No.: CV-12-9667-OOCL ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE COMMERCIAL LIST IN THE MATTER OF THE COMPANIES' CREDITORS ARRANGEMENT ACT, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-36, AS AMENDED, AND IN THE MATTER OF A PLAN OF COMPRISE OR ARRANGEMENT OF SINO-FOREST CORPORATION Court File No. CV-11-431153-00CP ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN: THE TRUSTEES OF THE LABOURERS' PENSION FUND OF CENTRAL AND EASTERN CANADA, THE TRUSTEES OF THE INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS LOCAL 793 PENSION PLAN FOR OPERATING ENGINEERS IN ONTARIO, SJUNDE AP-FONDEN, DAVID GRANT and ROBERT WONG Plaintiffs - and - SINO-FOREST CORPORATION, ERNST & YOUNG LLP, BDO LIMITED (formerly known as BDO MCCABE LO LIMITED), ALLEN T.Y. CHAN, W. JUDSON MARTIN, KAI KIT POON, DAVID J. HORSLEY, WILLIAM E. ARDELL, JAMES P. BOWLAND, JAMES M.E. HYDE, EDMUND MAK, SIMON MURRAY, PETER WANG, GARRY J. WEST, POYRY (BEIJING) CONSULTING COMPANY LIMITED, CREDIT SUISSE SECURITIES (CANADA), INC., TD SECURITIES INC., DUNDEE SECURITIES CORPORATION, RBC DOMINION SECURITIES INC., SCOTIA CAPITAL INC., CIBC WORLD MARKETS INC., MERRILL LYNCH CANADA INC., CANACCORD FINANCIAL LTD., MAISON PLACEMENTS CANADA INC., CREDIT SUISSE SECURITIES (USA) LLC and MERRILL LYNCH, PIERCE, FENNER & SMITH INCORPORATED (successor by merger to Banc of America Securities LLC) Defendants Proceeding under the Class Proceedings Act, 1992 SUPPLEMENTAL BOOK OF AUTHORITIES OF THE PLAINTIFFS (Motion for Fee Approval, returnable December 13, 2013) KOSKIE MINSKY LLP 900-20 Queen Street West, Box 52 Toronto ON M5H 3R3 Kirk M. Baert (LSUC No. 309420) Tel: 416-595-2117 / Fax: 416-204-2889 Jonathan Bida (LSUC No.
    [Show full text]
  • Amity Visit to Canada 2019 Ju
    Programme Overview Wednesday 18 September 2019 (Ottawa) 17:00 - Treasurer’s Lecture by The Hon Justice Rosalie Silberman Abella, Supreme Court of Canada at the National Arts Centre, followed by a reception and dinner CDN$195per ticket Friday 20 September 2019 (Toronto) 14:00 - Appellate Advocacy Discussion and Moot at the Rosalie Silberman Abella Moot Courtroom, University of Toronto Free to attend 19:00 - Bench Call (Chief Justice of Canada and Sheila Block) and dinner at Osgoode Hall CDN$225 per ticket Saturday 21 September 2019 (Toronto) 09:30 - Seminars at Osgoode Hall Free to attend 17:30 - Farewell reception at the CN Tower Free to attend For booking and payment information please click here For more information please contact the Inn’s Membership Manager, Oliver Muncey, at [email protected] 2 Wednesday 18 September 2019 (Ottawa) Treasurer’s Lecture The Hon Justice Rosalie Silberman Abella, Supreme Court of Canada A Generation of Justice’s Journey: Now what? Venue - National Arts Centre 17:00 - Lecture 18:00 - Reception 19:00 - Dinner 21:30 - Carriages Dress code – Lounge suite/business attire Guests welcome CDN$195per ticket For booking and payment information please click here 3 Friday 20 September 2019 (Toronto) Moot and Appellate Advocacy Discussion Venue - Rosalie Silberman Abella Moot Courtroom, University of Toronto 14:00 - Introduction and Appellate Advocacy Discussion Chair: Andrew Hochhauser QC, Essex Court Chambers Speakers: The Rt Hon The Lord Judge, former Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales The Hon Justice Graeme Mew, Superior Court of Justice 14:30 - Moot before the Supreme Court Judges: The Rt Hon Sir Stanley Burnton, One Essex Court and former Lord Justice of Appeal The Hon Justice Kathryn N.
    [Show full text]
  • Was Duplessis Right? Roderick A
    Document generated on 09/27/2021 4:21 p.m. McGill Law Journal Revue de droit de McGill Was Duplessis Right? Roderick A. Macdonald The Legacy of Roncarelli v. Duplessis, 1959-2009 Article abstract L’héritage de l’affaire Roncarelli c. Duplessis, 1959-2009 Given the inclination of legal scholars to progressively displace the meaning of Volume 55, Number 3, September 2010 a judicial decision from its context toward abstract propositions, it is no surprise that at its fiftieth anniversary, Roncarelli v. Duplessis has come to be URI: https://id.erudit.org/iderudit/1000618ar interpreted in Manichean terms. The complex currents of postwar society and DOI: https://doi.org/10.7202/1000618ar politics in Quebec are reduced to a simple story of good and evil in which evil is incarnated in Duplessis’s “persecution” of Roncarelli. See table of contents In this paper the author argues for a more nuanced interpretation of the case. He suggests that the thirteen opinions delivered at trial and on appeal reflect several debates about society, the state and law that are as important now as half a century ago. The personal socio-demography of the judges authoring Publisher(s) these opinions may have predisposed them to decide one way or the other; McGill Law Journal / Revue de droit de McGill however, the majority and dissenting opinions also diverged (even if unconsciously) in their philosophical leanings in relation to social theory ISSN (internormative pluralism), political theory (communitarianism), and legal theory (pragmatic instrumentalism). Today, these dimensions can be seen to 0024-9041 (print) provide support for each of the positions argued by Duplessis’s counsel in 1920-6356 (digital) Roncarelli given the state of the law in 1946.
    [Show full text]
  • The Honourable Justice Louis Lebel**
    A COMMON LAW OF THE WORLD? THE RECEPTION OF CUSTOMARY INTERNATIONAL LAW IN THE CANADIAN COMMON LAW* The Honourable Justice Louis LeBel** INTRODUCTION In an increasingly globalized world, the importance of international law to our domestic legal system continues to grow. This growth is both exponential and multi- dimensional. International law had been traditionally concerned with relations between states and about the status and action of international organizations. But today, not only is international law having a greater impact than ever on the state of domestic law, it also influences more areas of domestic law than ever. These areas include human rights, labour law, commercial law, intellectual property law, immigration and refugee law, and criminal law, to name but a few. In this paper, I intend to focus on the means by which customary international law exerts its influence on the Canadian domestic legal culture. As will be discussed in greater detail below, customary international law is developed by state practice and the recognition of the legally binding nature of this practice, while other parts of international law are grounded in treaties and other multilateral instruments, which reflect the contractual activities of states and organizations. I will address some intricacies of this process. Before I do so, however, I will use again an analogy which, at least for the classical music lovers, may be of some assistance to understand the issues of interaction of international and domestic law. A number of years ago, I co-wrote an article describing how the reception of international law into the Canadian legal order could be usefully compared to two distinct classical musical styles.
    [Show full text]
  • 71 History of Factums Je Côté* I
    HISTORY OF FACTUMS 71 HISTORY OF FACTUMS J.E. CÔTÉ* The history of the factum in Canada is little known Bien que l’histoire du mémoire au Canada soit peu but greatly significant in the development of written connue, elle a contribué de façon importante à argument. Written argument grew alongside the oral l’avènement de l’argumentation écrite, qui évolué en legal tradition. The factum developed in Canada in an parallèle avec la tradition de l’exposé oral. Le unorthodox way. Unlike most Canadian laws and mémoire s’est implanté au Canada selon une voie peu procedures, which find their roots in common law orthodoxe. Contrairement à la plupart des lois et England, the factum originated in Quebec’s civil procédures canadiennes qui prennent leur fondement jurisdiction before being adopted in the Northwest dans la common law de l’Angleterre, le mémoire a pris Territories. This article explores the evolution of son origine dans le système de droit civil du Québec written argument and the historical use of the factum avant d’être adopté dans les Territoires du Nord- in the United Kingdom and Canada and details the Ouest. Outre un survol de l’évolution de practice of factum use in Alberta particularly. l’argumentation écrite et de la façon dont on a eu recours au mémoire au Royaume-Uni et au Canada par le passé, l’article expose en détail l’utilisation du mémoire en Alberta. TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION .............................................. 71 II. EVOLUTION ................................................ 72 A. THE UNITED KINGDOM ................................... 72 B. QUEBEC ............................................... 74 C. THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA .........................
    [Show full text]
  • Procedural Fairness and the Drafting of Reasons
    Procedural Fairness and the Drafting of Reasons 17th Advanced Administrative Law & Practice The Canadian Institute October 24 - 25, 2017 Ottawa, Ontario Graham J. Clarke Arbitrator/Mediator 2 Procedural Fairness and the Drafting of Reasons TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 3 Recent Procedural Fairness Cases ............................................................................................ 4 Bias: Appearances Matter ...................................................................................................... 4 Evidence ................................................................................................................................ 5 Raising and deciding novel issues during the drafting process ............................................... 7 Quorum Matters: how much assistance can a decision maker receive? ................................. 8 A conclusion is not a decision ................................................................................................11 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................13 17th Advanced Administrative Law and Practice Graham J. Clarke The Canadian Institute Arbitrator/Mediator October 24-25, 2017 Ottawa, Ontario 3 Procedural Fairness and the Drafting of Reasons INTRODUCTION1 A client asked his new lawyer to guess why he had chosen to send him
    [Show full text]
  • A Gentle Reminder That Traditional Class Action Principles Are Not Passé?
    A Gentle Reminder that Traditional Class Action Principles are not Passé? Christine Carron Senior Partner, Ogilvy Renault INTRODUCTION The Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Bisaillon v. Concordia University will certainly spark a plethora of commentary from labour law specialists. In a narrow decision (four to three, Justices McLachlin, Bastarache and Binnie dissenting), the Supreme Court held that disputes arising over funding of the University’s pension plan were subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of a labour arbitrator and could not be resolved by way of a class action proceeding before the Quebec Superior Court. It is significant that there was no disagreement among the justices as to the principles that govern class action proceedings, collective agreements and the jurisdiction of arbitrators under those agreements. The justices were divided only with respect to the application of those principles to the specific facts of the case. We will leave it to others specializing in labour law to opine on whether the application of those principles to the facts at issue in the case will stand the test of time. Instead, this paper will focus on some of the principles applicable to class actions that were clearly enunciated and over which there was no disagreement. The reason is two-fold. First, these principles transcend the arena of labour law and have far-reaching implications for class actions generally. Second, their enunciation is all the more important given the paucity of judgments from the Supreme Court in Quebec class action proceedings. This paucity is due largely to the fact that judgments authorizing class actions may not be appealed in Quebec and many defendants prefer to settle when a class action is certified1 rather than risk an adverse judgment on the merits.
    [Show full text]
  • Beyond a Reasonable Doubt: Does It Apply to Finding the Law As Well As
    Beyond a Reasonable Doubt:Does it Apply to Finding the Law asWell as the Facts? Martin Friedland* 1. Introduction About a year ago I published an article in the Criminal Law Quarterly in which I examined the concept of proof beyond a reasonable doubt in criminal trials.1 I looked at its application to the proof of facts, historically, comparatively, and analytically. The standard of proof of facts Ð everyone agrees Ð plays a crucial role in the criminal process. What role does reasonable doubt play with respect to determining the criminal law, particularly the scope of statutory provisions? I had nevergivenseriousthoughttotheissue.Iknew,ofcourse,thatthereis a rule of strict construction of criminal legislation Ð known in the United States as the Rule of Lenity Ð and assumed that the rule only applies if there is a tie, which is really a balance of probability test. In other words, the better argument wins, with the ultimate burden being on the Crown.2 Many, if not most, readers probably assume this is the correct approach. The standard for finding the criminal law, like the standard of proof of facts, is important, yet surprisingly little has been written aboutit inCanada,3 unlikeinthe UnitedStates,wherethereare many major articles.4 There are, of course, relatively brief discussions in * Martin Friedland, CC, QC, University Professor and Professor of Law Emeritus, University of Toronto. I would like to thank Pavle Levkovic and Michael Stenbring for their excellent research assistance. I am also grateful to Ben Berger, Michael Code, Timothy Endicott, Matthew Gourlay, Kent Roach, Bob Sharpe, Simon Stern, Malcolm Thorburn, and Wes Wilson for their helpful comments on earlier drafts.
    [Show full text]
  • Curriculum Vitae FABIEN GÉLINAS Sir William C. Macdonald Professor of Law
    Curriculum vitae FABIEN GÉLINAS Sir William C. Macdonald Professor of Law McGill University Faculty of Law 3644 Peel Street Montreal (Qc) H3A 1W9 Telephone: +1 (514) 398 6623 Fax: +1 (514) 398 3233 [email protected] UNIVERSITY EDUCATION - D.Phil. University of Oxford 1995 Supervisor: Prof. John Finnis Examiners: Dr Geoffrey Marshall and Prof. Neil McCormick Commonwealth Scholarship 1991-94 F.C.A.R. Doctoral Scholarship 1992-95 Quebec Bar Scholarship 1993 and 1994 - LL.M. University of Montreal 1991 Supervisor: Prof. André Morel Examiners: Prof. Pierre-A. Côté and Prof. Danielle Pinard F.C.A.R. Masters Scholarship 1988-89 Louis-Philippe Taschereau Scholarship 1989 - [DEA] University of Poitiers (France) 1989 (one semester, private law) Exchange Programme with University of Montreal. - LL.B. University of Montreal 1988 Louis-Philippe Taschereau Scholarship 1988 First Prize, Rougier Foundation – International Jurists Commission Essay Competition 1987 Joseph Blain Prize 1986-87 Deacon-Kennedy Scholarship 1986-87 - [B.A.] University of Ottawa 1985 (two years of studies in political science) Rodrigue Normandin Scholarship 1983 (Admission Scholarship taken-up at the age of 16) CLERKSHIP - Supreme Court of Canada, 1989-90 Law Clerk to Justice Charles Doherty Gonthier. Fabien Gélinas , Page 2 of 45 OTHER COURSES - School of Diplomacy and Strategic Studies (École des hautes études internationales) ABD, Paris, 1996-97. - Centrum für Deutsche Sprache und Kultur, Frankfurt, 1996. - International Institute of Human Rights, Strasbourg, 1992. - Hague Academy of International Law, The Hague, 1989. - Bar School, Montreal, 1989 (registered barrister since 1990). EMPLOYMENT - McGill University (2016-) Sir William C. Macdonald Chair in Law - McGill University (2015-) Full Professor, Faculty of Law: courses: Resolution of International Disputes, Constitutional Law, Contractual Obligations.
    [Show full text]
  • Independent Advisory Board for Supreme Court of Canada Judicial Appointments
    Independent Advisory Board for Supreme Court of Canada Judicial Appointments Report on the 2021 Process July 28, 2021 Independent Advisory Board for Comité consultatif indépendant Supreme Court of Canada sur la nomination des juges de la Judicial Appointments Cour suprême du Canada July 28, 2021 The Right Honourable Justin Trudeau Prime Minister of Canada 80 Wellington Street Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0A2 Dear Prime Minister: Pursuant to our Terms of Reference, the Independent Advisory Board for Supreme Court of Canada Judicial Appointments submits this report on the 2021 process, including information on the mandate and the costs of the Advisory Board’s activities, statistics relating to the applications received, and recommendations for improvements to the process. We thank you for the opportunity to serve on the Advisory Board and to participate in such an important process. Respectfully, The Right Honourable Kim Campbell, C.P., C.C., O.B.C., Q.C. Chairperson of the Independent Advisory Board for Supreme Court of Canada Judicial Appointments Advisory Board members: David Henry Beverley Noel Salmon Signa A. Daum Shanks Jill Perry The Honourable Louise Charron Erika Chamberlain Independent Advisory Board for Comité consultatif indépendant Supreme Court of Canada sur la nomination des juges de la Judicial Appointments Cour suprême du Canada Table of Contents 1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 1 2. Establishment of the Advisory Board and the
    [Show full text]
  • Has the CJPTA Readied Canada for the Hague Choice of Court Convention? Geneviève Saumier Faculty of Law, Mcgill University
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by York University, Osgoode Hall Law School Osgoode Hall Law Journal Volume 55, Issue 1 (Winter 2018) The CJPTA: A Decade of Progress Article 4 Guest editors: Janet Walker, Gerard Kennedy, and Sagi Peari Has the CJPTA readied Canada for the Hague Choice of Court Convention? Geneviève Saumier Faculty of Law, McGill University Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/ohlj Part of the Law Commons Article This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License. Citation Information Saumier, Geneviève. "Has the CJPTA readied Canada for the Hague Choice of Court Convention?." Osgoode Hall Law Journal 55.1 (2018) : 141-162. http://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/ohlj/vol55/iss1/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Osgoode Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Osgoode Hall Law Journal by an authorized editor of Osgoode Digital Commons. Has the CJPTA readied Canada for the Hague Choice of Court Convention? Abstract This paper examines whether the Court Jurisdiction and Proceedings Transfer Act has readied Canada to adopt the 2005 Hague Choice of Court Convention. Reviewing the Hague Convention as well as previous and current law and cases on forum selection clauses in common law Canada, including the very recent Supreme Court of Canada decision in Douez v Facebook, yields two conclusions. First, there are existing interpretive challenges flowing from gaps in the CJPTA with respect to jurisdictional clauses that need to be addressed.
    [Show full text]
  • Canadian Legal Ethics: Ready for the Twenty-First Century at Last Adam M
    Osgoode Hall Law Journal Article 1 Volume 46, Number 1 (Spring 2008) Canadian Legal Ethics: Ready for the Twenty-First Century at Last Adam M. Dodek Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/ohlj Part of the Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility Commons Article Citation Information Dodek, Adam M.. "Canadian Legal Ethics: Ready for the Twenty-First Century at Last." Osgoode Hall Law Journal 46.1 (2008) : 1-49. http://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/ohlj/vol46/iss1/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Osgoode Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Osgoode Hall Law Journal by an authorized editor of Osgoode Digital Commons. Canadian Legal Ethics: Ready for the Twenty-First Century at Last Abstract This article analyzes the transformation in the scholarship of legal ethics that has occurred in Canada over the last decade, and maps out an agenda for future research. The uthora attributes the recent growth of Canadian legal ethics as an academic discipline to a number of interacting factors: a response to external pressures, initiatives within the legal profession, changes in Canadian legal education, and the emergence of a new cadre of legal ethics scholars. This article chronicles the public history of legal ethics in Canada over the last decade and analyzes the first and second wave of scholarship in the area. It integrates these developments within broader changes in legal education that set the stage for the continued expansion of Canadian legal ethics in the twenty-first century. Reprinted by permission of the publisher.
    [Show full text]