Law students typically learn about solicitor-client privilege as centred around the client. This privilege, so I was taught, ensures that clients can be frank with their lawyer; with the benefit of full disclosure from their client, lawyers can make the best case for their client. The facts in R v Fox turn this paradigm on its head: what if privilege is claimed not to protect the client, but the lawyer?
In R v Hussein, the SCC clarified the Corbett application. While the Corbett application has been upheld, albeit with clarifications, this Comment compares Hussein with the original R v Corbett case and argues that Hussein appears to favour La Forest J.’s Corbett dissent.
The Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) is set to hear the appeal of Nguyen c. Director of Criminal and Penal Prosecutions, 2024 QCCA 674 [Nguyen] where the Court of Appeal of Québec (“QCCA”) overturned the decision of the Court of Québec, which held that it had jurisdiction to hear the application of the prosecution [41400].
Bell was denied favourable goods and services tax (“GST”) treatment of its purchase of electricity, which was determined to be a single supply for the purpose of claiming input tax credits (“ITCs”) under the Excise Tax Act, RSC 1985, c E-15 [ETA]. In Bell Telephone Company of Canada v. Canada, 2025 FCA 27 [Bell Canada], The Federal Court of Appeal (“FCA”) […]
Canadian privacy law hit Facebook hard in the Federal Court of Appeal’s recent decision in Privacy Commissioner of Canada v Facebook inc., 2024 FCA 140 [Facebook]. The unanimous decision held that Facebook failed to obtain meaningful consent from users prior to disclosing user data. The decision is part of a larger trend in Canadian jurisprudence […]
The Supreme Court has recognized that habeas corpus is “the strongest tool a prisoner has to ensure that the deprivation of his or her liberty is not unlawful” (Mission Institution v Khela, 2014 SCC 24 at para 29 [Khela]). In Dorsey v Canada (Attorney General), the Court will decide [41132] whether that tool is available […]
In Ontario English Catholic Teachers’ Association v. Ontario (Attorney General), 2024 ONCA 101 [OECTA], the majority of the Ontario Court of Appeal (“ONCA” or the “Court”) upheld the Superior Court finding that Ontario’s Bill 124 (“the Bill” or “the Act”)- which places a cap on wages in the public sector–is unconstitutional in its application to […]
In Ontario Teacher Candidates’ Council v Ontario (Education), 2023 ONCA 788 [OTCC], the Ontario Court of Appeal ("ONCA") overturned a Divisional Court decision deeming Ontario’s Math Proficiency Test ("MPT"), aimed at incoming teaching candidates, constitutional and not contrary to s 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms ("Charter").
Content Warning: The facts of the case involve the mention of child sexual abuse. In R v Chatillon, 2023 SCC 7 [Chatillon], the Supreme Court of Canada ("SCC") delivered a brief oral judgment re-visiting a case-by-case privilege in the context where a patient makes criminal admissions during the course of therapeutic treatment. A 6-1 […]
In R v JJ (2022 SCC 28) (“JJ”), the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) considered the scope and legality of Bill C-51, which attempts to remove some of the hurdles that prevent victims of sexual assault (hereinafter referred to as “complainants”) from coming forward. The Bill was enacted in 2018, as An Act to amend […]