Joey Jang

Unreasonable Search and Seizure in the Workplace: SCC Grants Leave in YRDSB v ETFO

In Elementary Teachers Federation of Ontario v York Region District School Board, 2022 ONCA 476 [Elementary Teachers], the Ontario Court of Appeal (“ONCA”) explored whether employees had a right to be protected against unreasonable search and seizure in the workplace under section 8 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms [Charter]. Determining that employees have section 8 Charter rights, the ONCA also ruled on the scope of employees’ reasonable expectation of privacy, setting out important developments on this issue in the process. On March 16, 2023, the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) granted the application for leave to appeal in this case.

Statutory Accident Benefit Claims and Judicial Review: SCC Grants Leave in Yatar v TD Insurance

In Yatar v TD Insurance Meloche Monnex, 2022 ONCA 446 [Yatar], the Ontario Court of Appeal (“ONCA”) considered the scope of appellants’ right to the remedy of judicial review in cases regarding disputes over statutory accident benefit claims. After considering the relevant factors, it concluded that courts should only grant judicial reviews sparingly in the […]

Reasonable Expectation of Privacy in IP Addresses? SCC to Decide R v Bykovets

There have been a number of landmark cases where the Supreme Court of Canada ("SCC") considered and provided guidance on "the limits on informational privacy in the digital age" (Bykovets, para 1). In particular, in R v Spencer, 2014 SCC 43 [Spencer], the SCC established that police must obtain judicial authorization through a search warrant […]

A “Fresh Start” Doctrine: R v Beaver Protects Investigations from Charter Breaches

Serious Charter breaches risk undermining society’s confidence in Canada’s justice system. For this reason, courts have developed many comprehensive doctrines to guide police conduct in criminal investigations and to determine when the police have intruded too far into individual rights. In R v Beaver, 2022 SCC 54 [Beaver], the Supreme Court of Canada discussed four […]

How to Consider Agreements Between Spouses: SCC Grants Leave in Anderson v Anderson

There is a presumption of equal distribution of family property upon divorce under the Saskatchewan Family Property Act, SS 1997, c F-6.3 [FPA]. However, parties can contract out of this presumption by executing an agreement which outlines terms for dividing their family property. While parties can ensure the enforceability of their agreement by preparing a […]

Common Sense, Speculative Reasoning, and Judicial Notice: SCC Grants Leave in R v Kruk

Content Warning: This article includes details about an allegation of sexual assault that may evoke strong emotions. In R v Kruk, 2022 BCCA 18 [Kruk], the British Columbia Court of Appeal ("BCCA") noted that "[relying] on … life experience to assess the credibility of witnesses is a daily and appropriate exercise for trial judges" (Kruk, […]

R v Nahanee: Notices and Further Submissions in Contested Sentencing Hearings

Content Warning: This article mentions instances of sexual violence that may be triggering for some readers. R v Nahanee, 2022 SCC 37 [Nahanee] is a case which addressed two key issues related to contested sentencing hearings following a guilty plea. The first issue was whether sentencing judges could depart from sentencing ranges proposed by the […]

B.J.T. v J.D.: Considerations for Determining the Best Interests of the Child

B.J.T. v J.D., 2022 SCC 24 [B.J.T.] is a case concerning a custody dispute over a child in relation to the Child Protection Act, R.S.P.E.I. 1988, c. C-5.1 [CPA], Prince Edward Island’s child protection legislation.  The story of the parties is long, complicated, and distressing, with the battle for custody of W.D., the child, between […]

British Columbia v Council of Canadians with Disabilities: Deciding Public Interest Standing

In British Columbia (Attorney General) v Council of Canadians with Disabilities, 2022 SCC 27 [Council of Canadians SCC], the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) clarified how courts should apply the legal test for deciding whether to grant or deny public interest standing. Public interest standing is “an aspect of the law of standing” that “allows individuals […]

R v White: Defence Lawyers’ Mistakes and the Concept of Prejudice

The relationship between an accused and their defence lawyer is a crucial one; the performance of the defence lawyer can determine whether the accused is given the best defence possible during their criminal proceedings. In R v White, 2022 SCC 7 [White SCC], the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC” or "the Court") considered whether a […]