Your search

"The aim of this work is to provide a current book-length treatment of International Humanitarian Law (IHL), or the Law of Armed Conflict as it is sometimes known, from a Canadian perspective. Canada’s approach to war has shaped the way in which it interprets and implements international humanitarian law, or the law of armed conflict as it is also called. This handbook provides a useful “first stop” for the Canadian legal community on key topics in international humanitarian law, in a way which pays particular attention to Canadian sources, interpretations, applications and practices where they exist and are publicly available. At the same time, given the iterative nature of the development of international law, especially customary international law, the book will also be useful to practitioners and scholars internationally. Indeed, despite the paucity of publicly available material, Canada has been a regular actor in this area of law and its contributions to the development of international humanitarian law should be highlighted."-- Provided by publisher

The most controversial of the recent amendments to Ontario’s Class Proceedings Act is the addition of two requirements to the certification test: to meet the preferable procedure criterion, s. 5(1.1) requires that common issues in the litigation must now “predominate” over individual issues, and a class action must be “superior” to all other forms of resolution. The importance of the interpretation of Ontario’s new certification test to the continued viability of class actions in the province merits a thorough and rigorous analysis of s. 5(1.1). The language of predominance and superiority is strikingly similar to requirements that have long applied to US class actions for monetary damages. As courts in Ontario begin to grapple with the new predominance and superiority requirements, however, the authors caution against turning to American jurisprudence for guidance. Several important structural differences between the Ontario and American class action regimes, as well as different constitutional considerations and a variety of approaches within US case law diminish its utility. Instead, the authors examine the history and language of the amendments to propose an interpretation of the predominance and superiority requirements that is informed by Canada’s own procedural and constitutional framework and that avoids the pitfalls of legal transplants.

"Constitutions are meant to endure, providing both stability and adaptability. Their public legitimacy depends on the ability of the courts and other interpreters to get this balance right. Why, then, has Canada’s constitution--only four decades old--produced so many surprises? Canada's Surprising Constitution investigates unexpected interpretations of the Constitution Act, 1982 by the courts. In this illuminating collection of essays, leading scholars reflect on these surprising interpretations, focusing on fundamental freedoms; equality, Aboriginal, and language rights; structural features of the Charter; as well as the courts’ approach to the interpretation of the Constitution. The public legitimacy of the Constitution requires that it be seen as both relevant, as circumstances change, but also true to the values it embodies. The responsibility for getting this balance right lies not only with judges but also with legislatures, executives, scholars, advocates, and public interest organizations. The thoughtful work of this volume is crucial in identifying, accounting for, and--looking ahead--anticipating potential surprises. Its thorough analysis also offers a view of the Constitution in action."-- Provided by publisher

"Constitutions are meant to endure, providing both stability and adaptability. Their public legitimacy depends on the ability of the courts and other interpreters to get this balance right. Why, then, has Canada’s constitution--only four decades old--produced so many surprises? Canada's Surprising Constitution investigates unexpected interpretations of the Constitution Act, 1982 by the courts. In this illuminating collection of essays, leading scholars reflect on these surprising interpretations, focusing on fundamental freedoms; equality, Aboriginal, and language rights; structural features of the Charter; as well as the courts’ approach to the interpretation of the Constitution. The public legitimacy of the Constitution requires that it be seen as both relevant, as circumstances change, but also true to the values it embodies. The responsibility for getting this balance right lies not only with judges but also with legislatures, executives, scholars, advocates, and public interest organizations. The thoughtful work of this volume is crucial in identifying, accounting for, and--looking ahead--anticipating potential surprises. Its thorough analysis also offers a view of the Constitution in action."-- Provided by publisher

"In The Life and Death of Freedom of Expression, Richard Moon argues that freedom of expression is valuable because human agency and identity emerge in discourse--in the joint activity of creating meaning. Moon recognizes that the social character of individual agency and identity is crucial to understanding not only the value of expression but also its potential for harm. The book considers a range of issues, including the regulation of advertising, hate speech, pornography, blasphemy, and public protest. The book also considers the shift to social media as the principal platform for public engagement, which has added to the ways in which speech can be harmful, while undermining the effectiveness of traditional legal responses to harmful speech. The Life and Death of Freedom of Expression makes the case that the principal threat to public discourse may no longer be censorship, but rather the spread of disinformation, which undermines public trust in traditional sources of information and makes engagement between different positions and groups increasingly difficult."-- Provided by publisher

Noel Semple - The Inaccessibility of Justice in Ontario’s Adjudicative Tribunals: Symptoms and Diagnosis

This chapter is about the distance between law and justice, particularly for people labelled with intellectual disabilities. It calls for a disability-inclusive approach to understanding access to justice that shifts from a procedural justice paradigm to one that considers substantive conceptions of disability justice. The chapter also examines the critical perspectives of disability rights and disability justice, highlighting the gaps between idealized notions of rights and everyday experiences of rights violations. The chapter proposes that procedural reforms, alone, are insufficient and distract from the need for transformative change. In particular, the chapter discusses clear language judgments as a strategy to improve the comprehensibility of legal information. While clear language judgments have been praised, there are concerns that they may oversimplify complex legal concepts and fail to address underlying biases and injustices. This chapter warns against uncritical adoption and calls for broader transformative change toward collective liberation and elimination of disability injustice.

This chapter considers the distinctive nature of clinical legal education in North America. Both the USA and Canada have rich heritages of influential and inspirational clinical legal education. Clinicians from the USA have been leaders in the development of clinical pedagogy and scholarship. The scale and strength of US CLE means that clinical faculty are better embedded in their law schools than in other countries. Canadian clinical programs developed in the 1970s and forged distinctive connections to community legal aid agencies. The future trajectory of Canadian clinics is unclear with changes afoot for legal education and the regulation of the legal profession.

In a global era marked by surging racial nationalism and penal populism , anti-racist and decolonial research, education, and training has been under increasing threat in academia across the world. Popular use of the universalizing language of liberal internationalism as the dominant frame in discussing these developments leaves gaps in our understanding as to what areas of academic freedom are under the greatest threat, why they are under threat, what levers of sanction and discipline are used to suppress certain areas, and for what ends. Such a frame risks contributing to overly abstracted conceptualizations of academic freedom (and unfreedom) that are unmoored from the realities of how power operates in educational institutions and attendant maldistributions of who can in fact claim and be protected by academic freedom and who cannot.In this article, I put into conversation three very different jurisdictional contexts where nationalist backlash to, and suppression of, anti-racist and decolonial education and scholarship is occurring. Specifically, it examines American anti-Critical Race Theory (CRT) campaigns, Chinese suppression of scholarship critical of its ongoing colonial suppression of non-Han native peoples in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (XUAR), and Israeli suppression of scholarship critical of its ongoing occupation of Palestinian territories through the case study of the ‘Spiro scandal’ at the University of Toronto (UofT) Faculty of Law. No good politics of academic freedom can emerge without centering an analysis of broader societal power and subordination. This is particularly true in the areas of national security and anti-racism, which form both distinct grounds for legal and political intervention in academic freedom. A national security threat engages certain types of legal grounds, particularly domestically (e.g. carceral responses to perceived counterterrorism, separatism, and extremism threats) while anti-racism justifies other types of intervention (e.g. civil rights complaints, removing of curriculum, firings, cutting funding) and can operate powerfully on a transnational level as well. I highlight three common elements in a transnational blueprint that can be observed in the creation, justification, and operation of selective nationalist attacks on academic freedom in anti-racist and decolonial education. My highlighting of these common elements are not meant to suggest any sort of equivalence between their operation, historical context, and/or relative severity, but rather to advance our collective understanding of the distributive nature of academic freedom politics and its relationship to power, race, and colonialism. Unpacking these campaigns transnationally complicates and unsettles the dichotomy between authoritarian and liberal populist censorship, giving us a more nuanced foundation by which to protect academic freedom and knowledge production in the service of racial justice and collective liberation.

The first volume of the Canadian Bar Review (CBR) was published in 1923. In commemoration of the centenary of the CBR, this article briefly reflects on the journal’s history. In doing so, we highlight the CBR’s seminal role as a meeting place for scholarship, practice and legal traditions in Canada.

Drawing on elements of the Haudenosaunee Confederacy as a case study, this chapter on Indigenous international law interrogates the widely held and long-standing premise that international law is the sole purview of Europe. This chapter contends European-centred international law arose out of Europe, for European-based legal systems—namely common and civil legal traditions, now practised in many countries beyond Europe, such as Canada. Indigenous international law, conversely, continues to be engaged with today by many Indigenous nations around the world, arose from Indigenous world views. The chapter also examines some of the ways in which Indigenous international laws continue today in spite of colonial disruption.