DOCSLIB.ORG

Reports to Council St. John's, NL 15-17 August 2014

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Reports to Council St. John's, NL 15-17 August 2014 REPORTS TO COUNCIL CBA Legal Conference St. John’s, NL August 15 – 17, 2014 Reports to Council St. John’s, NL 15-17 August 2014 Reports to Council August 2014 Report of the President ................................................................................. 1 Branch Presidents’ Reports ......................................................................... 2 ALBERTA ...................................................................................................................... 3 BRITISH COLUMBIA ................................................................................................... 4 MANITOBA ................................................................................................................... 5 NEW BRUNSWICK ...................................................................................................... 7 NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR ...................................................................... 8 NORTHWEST TERRITORIES ................................................................................... 10 NOVA SCOTIA............................................................................................................ 11 NUNAVUT ................................................................................................................... 14 ONTARIO..................................................................................................................... 15 PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND ...................................................................................... 16 QUÉBEC....................................................................................................................... 17 SASKATCHEWAN ..................................................................................................... 19 YUKON ........................................................................................................................ 20 CCCA ............................................................................................................................ 22 Standing Committee Reports ..................................................................... 25 ACCESS TO JUSTICE COMMITTEE ........................................................................ 26 AWARDS COMMITTEE ............................................................................................ 27 CBA LEGAL CONFERENCE & MID-WINTER STEERING COMMITTEE .......... 28 COMMUNICATIONS COMMITTEE ......................................................................... 29 EQUALITY COMMITTEE .......................................................................................... 30 ETHICS AND PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY COMMITTEE ....................... 31 INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE ............................................... 33 JUDICIAL COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS COMMITTEE ............................. 35 LAW DAY COMMITTEE ........................................................................................... 36 LEGAL AID LIAISON COMMITTEE ........................................................................ 37 LEGISLATION AND LAW REFORM COMMITTEE ............................................. 38 MEMBERSHIP COMMITTEE .................................................................................... 41 PRO BONO COMMITTEE .......................................................................................... 42 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE .................................................. 43 RESOLUTIONS, CONSTITUTION AND BYLAWS ............................................... 44 SUPREME COURT OF CANADA BENCH AND BAR LIAISON COMMITTEE . 45 Special Committees and Task Forces ....................................................... 46 JOINT POLICY STATEMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE .......................................... 49 Editorial Boards .......................................................................................... 48 CANADIAN BAR REVIEW ....................................................................................... 49 National Sections ......................................................................................... 50 NATIONAL SECTIONS COUNCIL ........................................................................... 51 ABORIGINAL LAW.................................................................................................... 52 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW .......................................................................................... 54 AIR AND SPACE LAW .............................................................................................. 55 ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION ............................................................... 57 BANKRUPTCY, INSOLVENCY AND RESTRUCTURING .................................... 58 BUSINESS LAW.......................................................................................................... 60 CHARITIES AND NOT-FOR-PROFIT LAW ............................................................ 62 CIVIL LITIGATION .................................................................................................... 64 COMMODITY TAX, CUSTOMS & TRADE ............................................................. 66 COMPETITION LAW ................................................................................................. 67 CONSTITUTIONAL AND HUMAN RIGHTS LAW................................................ 69 CONSTRUCTION LAW.............................................................................................. 70 CRIMINAL JUSTICE .................................................................................................. 71 ELDER LAW................................................................................................................ 73 ENTERTAINMENT, MEDIA & COMMUNICATIONS LAW SECTION ............... 74 ENVIRONMENTAL, ENERGY AND RESOURCES LAW ..................................... 75 FAMILY LAW ............................................................................................................. 77 HEALTH LAW ............................................................................................................ 79 IMMIGRATION LAW ................................................................................................. 81 INSURANCE LAW...................................................................................................... 86 INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW ......................................................................... 87 INTERNATIONAL LAW ............................................................................................ 89 LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT LAW...................................................................... 90 LAW PRACTICE MANAGEMENT AND TECHNOLOGY ..................................... 92 MARITIME LAW ........................................................................................................ 93 MILITARY LAW ......................................................................................................... 94 MUNICIPAL LAW ...................................................................................................... 98 PENSIONS AND BENEFITS LAW ............................................................................ 99 PRIVACY AND ACCESS LAW ............................................................................... 101 REAL PROPERTY ..................................................................................................... 102 TAXATION LAW ...................................................................................................... 103 WILLS, ESTATES & TRUSTS ................................................................................. 104 Conferences ................................................................................................ 105 CANADIAN JUDGES’ FORUM ............................................................................... 106 FRENCH SPEAKING COMMON-LAW MEMBERS CONFERENCE .................. 107 LEGAL PROFESSION ASSISTANCE CONFERENCE .......................................... 108 PUBLIC SECTOR LAWYER’S FORUM ................................................................. 109 SEXUAL ORIENTATION AND GENDER IDENTITY CONFERENCE .............. 111 SMALL, SOLO AND GENERAL PRACTICE FORUM ......................................... 113 WOMEN LAWYERS FORUM ................................................................................. 114 YOUNG LAWYERS .................................................................................................. 119 Report of the President REPORT OF THE PRESIDENT FRED HEADON To be presented at Council 1 Branch Presidents’ Reports 2 ALBERTA MARIAN V. DE SOUZA, Q.C., PRESIDENT INFLUENCE AND LEADERSHIP: The Alberta Branch continues to enhance its leadership role in promoting the rule of law and independence of the judiciary, participating as a stakeholder with respect to changes to the Land Titles System, Traffic Court and Employment Standards. We made submissions in support of independence of the judiciary before the Justice of the Peace Compensation Review commission, resulting in a successful order in court. We supported sustainable funding for Drug Treatment Court in Calgary and pursuant to the Equal Justice report, as endorsed by national Council, continue to participate in the Joint Action Forum on Civil and Family members, hosted by the provincial government. On April 10 & 11, 2014, the Alberta Branch proudly marked the Court of Appeal centenary, with a gala dinner and symposium.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Conservatives, the Supreme Court of Canada, and the Constitution: Judicial-Government Relations, 2006–2015 Christopher Manfredi 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 Article 6 Volume 52, Issue 3 (Summer 2015) Conservatives, the Supreme Court of Canada, and the Constitution: Judicial-Government Relations, 2006–2015 Christopher Manfredi 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 Manfredi, Christopher. "Conservatives, the Supreme Court of Canada, and the Constitution: Judicial-Government Relations, 2006–2015." Osgoode Hall Law Journal 52.3 (2015) : 951-984. http://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/ohlj/vol52/iss3/6 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. Conservatives, the Supreme Court of Canada, and the Constitution: Judicial-Government Relations, 2006–2015 Abstract Three high-profile government losses in the Supreme Court of Canada in late 2013 and early 2014, combined with the government’s response to those losses, generated a narrative of an especially fractious relationship between Stephen Harper’s Conservative government and the Court. This article analyzes this narrative more rigorously by going beyond a mere tallying of government wins and losses in the Court. Specifically, it examines Charter-based invalidations of federal legislation since 2006, three critical reference opinions rendered at the government’s own request, and two key judgments delivered in the spring of 2015 concerning Aboriginal rights and the elimination of the long-gun registry.
    [Show full text]
  • Reforming the Supreme Court Appointment Process, 2004-2014: a 10-Year Democratic Audit 2014 Canliidocs 33319 Adam M
    The Supreme Court Law Review: Osgoode’s Annual Constitutional Cases Conference Volume 67 (2014) Article 4 Reforming the Supreme Court Appointment Process, 2004-2014: A 10-Year Democratic Audit 2014 CanLIIDocs 33319 Adam M. Dodek Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/sclr This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License. Citation Information Dodek, Adam M.. "Reforming the Supreme Court Appointment Process, 2004-2014: A 10-Year Democratic Audit." The Supreme Court Law Review: Osgoode’s Annual Constitutional Cases Conference 67. (2014). http://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/sclr/vol67/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 The uS preme Court Law Review: Osgoode’s Annual Constitutional Cases Conference by an authorized editor of Osgoode Digital Commons. Reforming the Supreme Court Appointment Process, 2004-2014: A 10-Year Democratic Audit* Adam M. Dodek** 2014 CanLIIDocs 33319 The way in which Justice Rothstein was appointed marks an historic change in how we appoint judges in this country. It brought unprecedented openness and accountability to the process. The hearings allowed Canadians to get to know Justice Rothstein through their members of Parliament in a way that was not previously possible.1 — The Rt. Hon. Stephen Harper, PC [J]udicial appointments … [are] a critical part of the administration of justice in Canada … This is a legacy issue, and it will live on long after those who have the temporary stewardship of this position are no longer there.
    [Show full text]
  • “Canada” on the Supreme Court in 2016
    DRAFT | CPSA 2017 Please don’t cite without permission Competing Diversities: Representing “Canada” on the Supreme Court in 2016 Erin Crandall | Acadia University Robert Schertzer | University of Toronto The Supreme Court oF Canada’s (SCC) inFluence on politics and public policy – from deciding human rights cases to adjudicating Federal-provincial disputes – has long placed it in the spotlight oF political actors and watchers alike. Seeing the Court as activist or restrained, as siding with the Federal government or as balanced in its Federalism case law, as anti-democratic or the guardian oF the constitution, are all hallmarks oF the debate about its place in Canadian politics. Underpinning these debates is an often-critical focus on the justices’ themselves, the process by which they are selected, and the virtually unFettered power Prime Ministers have had in appointing individuals to the bench. In August 2016, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau clearly established his position within this debate by announcing a new way to choose SCC justices. Along with promoting more transparency and accountability in the process, the key elements oF Trudeau’s proposed reForms were to ensure that all future justices were functionally bilingual and that they represent the diversity of Canada (see Trudeau 2016b). In line with these new objectives, one oF the First things Trudeau highlighted in his announcement was a willingness to break with the convention of regional representation on the bench and move toward an open application process. With the upcoming retirement of Nova Scotia Justice Thomas Cromwell in September 2016, questions immediately emerged as to whether the government would deviate from the tradition of having one of the nine justices on the SCC come from Atlantic Canada.
    [Show full text]
  • Was Stephen Harper Really Tough on Crime? a Systems and Symbolic Action Analysis
    Was Stephen Harper Really Tough on Crime? A Systems and Symbolic Action Analysis A thesis submitted to The College of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies In partial fulfilment of the requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy In the Department of Sociology University of Saskatchewan Saskatoon By Mark Jacob Stobbe ©Mark Jacob Stobbe, September 2018. All rights reserved. PERMISSION TO USE In presenting this thesis in partial fulfillment of the requirement for a postgraduate degree from the University of Saskatchewan, I agree that the libraries of this University may make it freely available for inspection. I further agree that permission for copying of this thesis in any manner, in whole or part, for scholarly purposes, may be granted by the professor or professors who supervised my thesis work or, in their absence, by the Head of the Department or the Dean of the College in which my thesis was done. It is understood that any copying, publication or use of this thesis or parts thereof for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. It is also understood that due recognition shall be given to me and the University of Saskatchewan in any scholarly use which may be made of any material in my thesis. Request for permission to copy or use of whole or part of this thesis may be addressed to: Department of Sociology University of Saskatchewan 1019 - 9 Campus Drive Saskatoon, SK Canada S7N 5A5 OR College of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies University of Saskatchewan Room 116 Thorvaldson Building, 110 Science Place Saskatoon SK Canada S7N 5C9 i ABSTRACT In 2006, the Hon.
    [Show full text]
  • Mandatory Minimum Sentences in Canada
    APPEAL VOLUME 23 n 89 ARTICLE CRUEL, UNUSUAL, AND CONSTITUTIONALLY INFIRM: MANDATORY MINIMUM SENTENCES IN CANADA Sarah Chaster * CITED: (2018) 23 Appeal 89 INTRODUCTION..................................................90 I. AN OVERVIEW OF MANDATORY MINIMUM SENTENCING.........90 A. An Overview of Sentencing in Canada. ..............................91 B. The History of Mandatory Minimum Sentences .......................92 C. Academic Reaction to MMS: Social Science and Political Perceptions .......92 II. FROM SMITH TO LLOYD—CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT ...95 A. Section 12 and the Reasonable Hypothetical ..........................96 B. Gross Disproportionality: A Workable Threshold? .....................100 C. Prosecutorial Discretion and Hybrid Offences ........................100 D. What Remedy?................................................102 E. Nur and Lloyd: Success and Failure.................................103 III. LEGISLATIVE EXEMPTION CLAUSES AND RESIDUAL CONSTITUTIONAL FRAILTIES ..................................105 A. Legislative Exemption Clauses ....................................105 i. General Exemption Clause....................................108 ii. Threshold of “Substantial and Compelling Circumstances” ...........109 iii. Written Reasons Requirement .................................110 B. Constitutional Challenges: Section 15 ..............................111 i. Section 15: Substantive Inequality in MMS .......................112 ii. Section 1: Deference and Dialogue .............................117 CONCLUSION ...................................................118
    [Show full text]
  • The New Process for Judicial Appointments to the Supreme Court of Canada
    THE NEW PROCESS FOR JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS TO THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA Report of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights Anthony Housefather Chair FEBRUARY 2017 42nd PARLIAMENT, 1st SESSION Published under the authority of the Speaker of the House of Commons SPEAKER’S PERMISSION Reproduction of the proceedings of the House of Commons and its Committees, in whole or in part and in any medium, is hereby permitted provided that the reproduction is accurate and is not presented as official. This permission does not extend to reproduction, distribution or use for commercial purpose of financial gain. Reproduction or use outside this permission or without authorization may be treated as copyright infringement in accordance with the Copyright Act. Authorization may be obtained on written application to the Office of the Speaker of the House of Commons. Reproduction in accordance with this permission does not constitute publication under the authority of the House of Commons. The absolute privilege that applies to the proceedings of the House of Commons does not extend to these permitted reproductions. Where a reproduction includes briefs to a Standing Committee of the House of Commons, authorization for reproduction may be required from the authors in accordance with the Copyright Act. Nothing in this permission abrogates or derogates from the privileges, powers, immunities and rights of the House of Commons and its Committees. For greater certainty, this permission does not affect the prohibition against impeaching or questioning the proceedings of the House of Commons in courts or otherwise. The House of Commons retains the right and privilege to find users in contempt of Parliament if a reproduction or use is not in accordance with this permission.
    [Show full text]
  • Constitutional Cases 2017: an Overview Lorne Sossin 2019 Canliidocs 4052 Osgoode Hall Law School of York University, [email protected]
    The Supreme Court Law Review: Osgoode’s Annual Constitutional Cases Conference Volume 88 (2019) Article 1 Constitutional Cases 2017: An Overview Lorne Sossin 2019 CanLIIDocs 4052 Osgoode Hall Law School of York University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/sclr Part of the Law Commons This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License. Citation Information Sossin, Lorne. "Constitutional Cases 2017: An Overview." The Supreme Court Law Review: Osgoode’s Annual Constitutional Cases Conference 88. (2019). https://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/sclr/vol88/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 The uS preme Court Law Review: Osgoode’s Annual Constitutional Cases Conference by an authorized editor of Osgoode Digital Commons. 2019 CanLIIDocs 4052 Part I Introduction 1 2019 CanLIIDocs 4052 Constitutional Cases 2017: An Overview Lorne Sossin* 2019 CanLIIDocs 4052 This contribution reviews the Constitutional Cases issued by the Supreme Court in 2017. The analysis is divided into two parts. In the first part, I analyze the year as a whole, identifying noteworthy trends. In the second part, I explore some specific constitutional decisions of the Court — especially those concerning issues which in my view have important implications for the future of the Court and its constitutional jurisprudence. I. 2017: A YEAR IN REVIEW 2017 might best be described as a year in transition for the Supreme Court of Canada. This year represented Chief Justice McLachlin’s last on the Court (though cases on which she participated continued to be released through June 2018).
    [Show full text]
  • The Tenth Justice
    THE TENTH JUSTICE Judicial Appointments, Marc Nadon, and the Supreme Court Act Reference Carissima Mathen and Michael Plaxton Landmark Cases in Canadian Law Since Confederation, Canada’s highest court – first the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in England and then the Supreme Court of Canada – has issued a series of often contentious decisions that have fundamentally shaped the nation. Both cheered and jeered, these judgments have impacted every aspect of Canadian society, setting legal precedents and provoking social change. The issues in the judgments range from Aboriginal title, gender equality, and freedom of expression to Quebec secession and intellectual property. This series offers com- prehensive, book-length examinations of high court cases that have had a major impact on Canadian law, politics, and society. Other books in the series are: Flawed Precedent: TheSt. Catherine’s Case and Aboriginal Title by Kent McNeil Privacy in Peril: Hunter v Southam and the Drift from Reasonable Search Protections by Richard Jochelson and David Ireland From Wardship to Rights: TheGuerin Case and Aboriginal Law by Jim Reynolds For a list of other titles, see www.ubcpress.ca/landmark-cases-in-canadian-law. LANDMARK CASES IN CANADIAN LAW Contents Acknowledgments vii Introduction 3 1 What’s So Bad about Marc Nadon? 9 2 The Prime Minister’s Prerogative 22 3 Memos 38 4 Asking and Telling 69 5 The Legal Showdown 84 6 The Opinion and Its Critics 106 7 The Aftermath 124 8 Judicial Appointments Law 140 9 A Court Frozen in Amber 156 Conclusion 179
    [Show full text]
  • Expert Report of the Hon. Thomas Cromwell
    IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION UNDER CHAPTER ELEVEN OF THE NORTH AMERICAN FREE TRADE AGREEMENT AND THE UNCITRAL ARBITRATION RULES BETWEEN: WILLIAM RALPH CLAYTON, WILLIAM RICHARD CLAYTON, DOUGLAS CLAYTON, DANIEL CLAYTON AND BILCON OF DELAWARE INC. Claimants AND: GOVERNMENT OF CANADA Respondent EXPERT REPORT OF THE HON. THOMAS CROMWELL NOVEMBER 6, 2017 TO: Trade Law Bureau Government of Canada Lester B. Pearson Building 125 Sussex Drive Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0G2 CANADA Contents PART I - SUMMARY OF QUALIFICATIONS AND RELEVANCE TO OPINION SOUGHT .......... 3 PART II - INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW ...................................................................................... 3 PART III - GENERAL LEGAL PRINCIPLES RELATING TO MINISTERIAL DISCRETION ....... 5 PART IV – ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................................. 7 A. Dean Sossin’s opinion fails to give sufficient weight to the broad and not expressly constrained discretion conferred on the Nova Scotia Minister to approve or reject a project. ........................................ 7 1) The Statutory Purpose and the Minister’s Role .............................................................................. 7 2) The Assessment Process and the Minister’s Role ......................................................................... 11 3) The Joint Review Process ............................................................................................................. 15 4) Other Ministerial
    [Show full text]
  • 'Atlantic Seat' on the Supreme Court of Canada: an Endangered Species?
    Osgoode Hall Law School of York University Osgoode Digital Commons Research Papers, Working Papers, Conference All Papers Papers 2017 The Atl‘ antic Seat’ on the Supreme Court of Canada: An Endangered Species? Philip Girard Osgoode Hall Law School of York University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/all_papers Part of the Law Commons Repository Citation Girard, Philip, "The A‘ tlantic Seat’ on the Supreme Court of Canada: An Endangered Species?" (2017). All Papers. 277. https://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/all_papers/277 This Working Paper is brought to you for free and open access by the Research Papers, Working Papers, Conference Papers at Osgoode Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Papers by an authorized administrator of Osgoode Digital Commons. “The ‘Atlantic Seat’ on the Supreme Court of Canada: An Endangered Species?” Philip Girard* I. Introduction The sigh of relief on the Atlantic coast could be heard all the way to Ottawa on October 17, 2016. On that day, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced the nomination of Justice Malcolm Rowe of the Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada seat vacated by Justice Thomas Cromwell. Justice Cromwell’s replacement was to be the first appointed pursuant to a new process put in place by the Trudeau government. When that process was unveiled on August 2, 2016, Trudeau announced that the position would be open to any qualified Canadian lawyer or judge who was functionally bilingual and “representative of the diversity of our great country.” A further clarification stated that “[a]pplications are being accepted from across Canada in order to allow for a selection process that ensures outstanding individuals are considered for appointment to the Supreme Court of Canada,” confirming that Atlantic Canadians did not have a lock on the position.1 People on the east coast generally take most things in stride, but this proposed change created a considerable outcry.
    [Show full text]
  • Justice Cromwell Gets Candid See Pg
    JANUARY 2017 RETIRED SCC JUSTICE CROMWELL GETS CANDID SEE PG. 18 MORE JUDICIAL NEWS SEE PG. 20 ALUMNA AND PROFESSOR HELP STRENGTHEN JUSTICE FOR INTERNATIONAL CRIMES SEE PG. 8 ALUMNI CELEBRATE QUEEN’S LAW AT FALL RECEPTIONS SEE PG. 56 REMEMBERING FORMER DEAN’S COUNCIL VICE-CHAIR, STEPHEN SIGURDSON, LAW’84 SEE PG. 34 INTRODUCTION ALUMNI/STUDENT INDEX DEAN’S COUNCIL MEMBERS Class of ’66 Class of ’90 Class of ’10 Sheila A. Murray, Law’82 (Com’79) Governor General David Robert Emblem…60 Patrick Welsh…5 Chair Johnston…30, 31 David Kerzner (PhD ’15)…33 Staying in Touch President and General Counsel Class of ’12 CI Financial Corp. Class of ’70 Class of ’91 Brianna Guenther…64-65 Queen’s Law Reports Online George Windsor…56 David Allgood, Law’74 (Arts’70) Priscilla Ferrazzi (LLM’07)…38 Kevin Guenther…64-65 is a periodic electronic update of Past Chair How are we doing so far? Counsel Queen’s Law Reports magazine Class of ’71 Class of ’92 Class of ’13 Dentons Canada LLP published by David Pattenden…35 Marie Beyette…42 Karla McGrath (LLM)…16 Sunita Doobay…42 Laura Sigurdsson…34 Betty DelBianco, Law’84 QUEEN’S FACULTY OF LAW Class of ’72 Pam MacEachern…28 Executive VP, Chief Legal & Administrative Officer MARKETING AND COMMUNICATIONS and Corporate Secretary Michel Picher…30-31 Jana Mills…17 Class of ’14 Matt Shepherd, Director Celestica Inc. Justice David Wake…24-25 Douglass Dawson…5 Macdonald Hall Class of ’93 Brandon Kerstens…5 Queen’s University Janet Fuhrer, Law’85 Class of ’76 Ida Bianchi…28 Partner Kingston ON Canada K7L 3N6 Justice Thomas Cromwell Gary Clarke…65 Class of ’15 Ridout & Maybee LLP law.queensu.ca …18-19, 22 Professor Arthur Cockfield Rachel Eichholtz…11 Peter Griffin, Law’77 Editor …33, 43 Managing Partner, Toronto Office Lisa Graham, Com’88, Artsci’92, MPA’08 Class of ‘77 Barbara Johnston…64 Class of ’16 Lenczner Slaght Royce Smith Griffin LLP Manager of Communications Dave McInnis…68 Sean Kearney…28 Nancy Brar…11 In 2016, Queen’s Law produced three types Thomas A.
    [Show full text]
  • Surviving in a Sea of Change: New Solutions for Recurring Problems
    3849_eng_00.qxd 7/29/2005 8:00 AM Page 1 cba.org National Administrative Law and Labour/Employment Law CLE Conference Surviving in a Sea of Change: New Solutions for Recurring Problems Presented by the National Administrative The premier CLE event returns for lawyers in administrative law or labour Law Section, the Labour and Employment and employment law! Get up-to-date on recent developments, and learn Law Section, and the Continuing Legal Education Committee new tips that you can immediately incorporate into your practice from some of the biggest names in these areas of the law. November 18-19, 2005 Westin Hotel Ottawa, Ontario Speakers include leading authors and practitioners such as David Phillip Jones, Q.C., Prof. David Mullan and Guy Du Pont. Also hear prominent judges and decision-makers, including Mr Justice Ian Binnie of the Supreme Court of Canada, Chief Justice John Richard of the Federal Court of Appeal, and a panel of 3 labour board chairs. SPONSOR CONFERENCE ORGANIZERS Susan Trylinski Robert Dawson Charles G. Harrison Pierre Moreau This program has been accredited by the Labour Law Specialty Committee of the Law Society of Upper Canada for 10 hours towards the professional development requirement for certification. 3849_eng_00.qxd 7/29/2005 8:00 AM Page 2 Program Agenda FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 18TH, 2005 8:00 – 8:45 REGISTRATION 8:45 – 9:00 WELCOME • Susan Trylinski (Chair, CBA Administrative Law Section) • Malcolm Boyle (Chair, CBA Labour and Employment Law Section) 9:00 - 10:15 PLENARY SESSION RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN ADMINISTRATIVE LAW AND LABOUR LAW Speakers: • David Phillip Jones, Q.C.
    [Show full text]