Home »

Stephen Fulford

R v Bykovets: Police Protocol for Internet Protocol

In R v Bykovets, 2024 SCC 6, the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) decided that Canadians have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their Internet Protocol (“IP”) addresses. As a result, law enforcement and investigative agencies will require judicial authorization to compel disclosure of IP addresses, or else be found to breach section 8 of […]

APPEAL WATCH: R v Pan, a legally messy murder 

The Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) has granted leave to appeal the long and complex case of R v Pan 2023 ONCA 362 [Pan]. At trial, four co-accused – Jennifer Pan (“Pan”), Daniel Chi-Kwong Wong (“Wong”), Lenford Crawford (“Crawford”), and David Mylvaganam (“Mylvaganam”) – were all convicted of first-degree murder and attempted murder in the […]

Ewen: The judge-represented litigant

The Federal Court of Appeal (the “FCA”) resolved an “unusual question” about the Federal Court’s jurisdiction to raise a substantive question not raised by the parties in the context of an urgent motion for judicial review. In Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) v Ewen, 2023 FCA 225 [Ewen], the FCA considered the unprompted decision […]

​​R v Greater Sudbury: Belt and Brace Yourself for this Decision

In R v Greater Sudbury (City) 2023 SCC 28, the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) decided the “belt and braces” theory for workplace safety warrants treating project owners as employers under the Occupational Health and Safety Act, RSO 1990, c O1 (“OHSA” or “Act”) when they hire a constructor, resulting in the duties for owners […]

Ponce: When an atmosphere of trust is betrayed

Introduction The two presidents of a Québec-based insurance group betrayed an atmosphere of trust with the majority shareholders. In Ponce v Société d’investissements Rhéaume ltée, 2023 SCC 25 [Ponce] the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) showcased Québec’s requirement for courts to consider the spirit of contractual business relationships in deciding if a legal remedy is […]

R v Basque: Strange Statutory Interpretation

Section 259(1)(a) of the Criminal Code of Canada [Code] imposes a mandatory minimum; at sentencing, judges must apply a driving prohibition of at least twelve months for offenders convicted of impaired driving pursuant to this provision. Interpretation of the interaction between three provisions implies that pre-sentence driving prohibitions cannot be credited toward that minimum. The […]

Appeal Watch: Is a closing window to address a future safety risk urgent? R v Campbell

The Ontario Court of Appeal (“ONCA”) applied the rapidly developing law surrounding the expectation of privacy in cell phones and police operations in R v Campbell, 2022 ONCA 666 [Campbell, ONCA]. The ONCA affirmed that people have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their text messages when the police legally seize any cell phone containing […]

Hansman v Neufeld: Speech Promoting Equality is More Equal

The Supreme Court of Canada (“the Court”) has recognized that expression promoting equality by countering harmful speech is worthy of heightened protection because of its relation to Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms [Charter] s. 15(1) values, which bring it closer to the core values animating s. 2(b).