Legally Speaking with Michael Mulligan

The legal landscape in Canada continues to evolve with significant implications for sexual assault cases, courtroom procedures, and sentencing guidelines.A groundbreaking Supreme Court of Canada decision has overturned a British Columbia sexual assault conviction in a case where prosecutors introduced evidence about the complainant's sexual inexperience without proper screening. The Court established that "sexual inactivity evidence" – including statements about virginity or lack of sexual interest – must face the same strict admissibility standards as evidence about past sexual activity. This landmark ruling recognizes that just as past consent doesn't imply present consent, past abstinence doesn't imply present non-consent. The decision extends protections against "twin myth reasoning" to both sides of the courtroom, requiring voir dire hearings whenever either Crown or defence wishes to introduce evidence about sexual history or the lack thereof.Meanwhile, the BC Supreme Court has issued a fascinating new practice direction on witness oaths and affirmations. While the Bible remains available in courtrooms, witnesses wishing to swear upon other religious or cultural items must now bring their own. The directive specifically addresses concerns about ceremonial practices that might compromise courtroom "dignity, decorum and/or safety" – a provision likely influenced by historical oath ceremonies involving chicken beheadings, candle-burning rituals, saucer-smashing, and other culturally-specific practices. This raises profound questions about the continued relevance of religious declarations in modern court proceedings and whether simply affirming to tell the truth might better serve justice.The courts also clarified the binding nature of joint submissions in a manslaughter case involving a man whose push led to his girlfriend's accidental fatal fall from a cliff. The BC Court of Appeal emphasized that judges cannot "tinker" with sentencing agreements between prosecution and defence unless they would "bring the administration of justice into disrepute." This high threshold protects the plea bargaining system that keeps our courts functioning. These cases collectively demonstrate how Canadian courts continue to balance procedural fairness, cultural sensitivity, and practical administration of justice in an evolving society. Subscribe to hear more analysis of pivotal legal developments that shape our justice system and reflect our changing social values.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed.

What happens when crucial evidence is withheld from the defence in a murder case? The devastating consequences unfolded in a tragic BC case where a woman's life was completely shattered after being wrongfully convicted in connection with a toddler's drowning death.The Supreme Court of Canada recently ordered an acquittal for a woman who served a year in prison after pleading guilty to criminal negligence causing death. She made this plea without knowing that Crown prosecutors had withheld 140 pages of material questioning the reliability of the medical examiner whose opinions were central to the case against her. The consequences went far beyond her prison sentence—she lost custody of her four children, faced community ostracism, developed drug addiction, and eventually became homeless.This miscarriage of justice highlights the critical importance of proper evidence disclosure in our legal system. Even the family of the deceased toddler supported the acquittal, recognizing the compounded tragedy when justice fails. Adding a bizarre twist to this case, the Alberta government recently issued an apology to the medical examiner, stating "there have been no miscarriages of justice" connected to his work - apparently contradicting the findings of both the British Columbia Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court of Canada.In another revealing case, a permanent resident faces deportation after 34 years in Canada due to impaired driving convictions. Despite police violating his rights by video recording him using the toilet in his cell (which the judge acknowledged warranted some sentence reduction), the court declined to artificially lower his sentence below the six-month threshold that triggers deportation proceedings. With 32 driving prohibitions on his record, the judge was "flabbergasted" that the Crown wasn't seeking maximum penalties.These cases offer crucial warnings: for legal professionals about proper evidence handling, for permanent residents about pursuing citizenship when eligible, and for law enforcement about respecting constitutional rights even when dealing with repeat offenders. When our justice system fails, the human cost can be immeasurable.Subscribe to hear more stories about the intersection of law, justice, and human lives on Legally Speaking with Michael Mulligan.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed. 

Navigating the legal maze of property transactions and civil judgments requires understanding nuances that aren't always obvious. Michael Mulligan, barrister and solicitor with Mulligan Defence Lawyers, unpacks two fascinating cases that illuminate these complexities.First, Mulligan explores a cautionary tale about what constitutes a "fixture" in home purchases. When buyers discovered a beloved dresser missing after taking possession—revealing holes in the wall behind it—they sued for $7,430 in damages. The case hinged on whether the dresser qualified as a fixture that should remain with the property. The legal test? If an item is attached to the property in a way that removal would cause damage, it's likely a fixture. Those IKEA bookshelves you've secured to walls? They might legally transfer with your home unless specifically excluded in the sale contract.The same dispute involved "conversation sets" on patios—a vague term that led to confusion when the sellers removed chairs and a large wicker sectional. Despite going to court, the buyers received just $100 for their trouble, demonstrating how ambiguous contract language and litigation costs can result in pyrrhic victories. Mulligan's advice is crystal clear: be specific in contracts about what stays and what goes when selling or buying property.The conversation shifts to a disturbing case involving a disbarred lawyer convicted of sexually assaulting a potential client in his office. When sued civilly, he claimed any judgment would be pointless as he'd simply declare bankruptcy again. This reveals a common misconception about bankruptcy protection. While bankruptcy can discharge many debts, Section 178 of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act specifically excludes sexual assault damages, intentional torts, fraud, and court fines from discharge. The $270,000 judgment against him would survive bankruptcy—though collecting from someone without assets remains challenging regardless.These cases illustrate critical principles: precise language prevents expensive disputes, bankruptcy won't erase obligations from intentional wrongdoing, and winning a judgment doesn't guarantee collection. Whether you're buying a home or seeking justice through civil courts, understanding these legal realities can save you significant time, money, and heartache.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed.

Ever wondered if your dog could land you in legal hot water? Or what happens when your neighbour's business becomes an unbearable nuisance? Legal expert Michael Mulligan returns to Legally Speaking with three captivating cases that reveal the fascinating intersection of everyday life and Canadian law.The spotlight first falls on Juliet, a miniature Australian shepherd whose elevator encounter led to a $4,800 claim after she allegedly bit a woman's hand. Mulligan unpacks the surprising legal doctrine that essentially gives dogs "one free bite" before owners face liability. The Civil Resolution Tribunal's dismissal of the case highlights the important distinction between a single incident and established patterns of behaviour in animal liability cases. Dog owners across British Columbia might breathe easier knowing that, without prior knowledge of aggressive tendencies, they're unlikely to face legal consequences for an otherwise well-behaved pet's first transgression.Things heat up with the case of a small-town gas station that found itself embroiled in a 20-day trial complete with acoustics and vapour experts. When the station relocated its underground tanks, neighbouring residents endured years of noise, fumes, and bright lights from fuel deliveries. Though the court acknowledged these disturbances constituted a legal nuisance, it rejected demands to shut down operations. Instead, the judge awarded $80,000 to the affected family, demonstrating how Canadian courts balance individual property rights against broader community needs. The Court of Appeal's affirmation of this approach reveals the remarkable discretion judges maintain when crafting remedies that serve competing interests.The final case delivers a cautionary tale featuring a BC Housing tenant known variously as "Lover-Peace" and "Emotions Universe," whose troublesome behaviour resulted in his designation as a "vexatious litigant." After breaching an agreement to vacate public housing in exchange for rental supplements, his attempt to appeal his eviction order led to a full-day hearing where his pattern of harassing behaviour toward legal professionals came to light. The $2,500 special costs penalty imposed sends a clear message about the consequences of abusing the legal system.Want to explore more fascinating intersections of law and everyday life? Join us next week for another edition of Legally Speaking, where Michael Mulligan continues to demystify Canadian jurisprudence one compelling case at a time.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed.

The BC Court of Appeal has delivered a significant ruling that serves as a stark warning to property sellers: crossing out questions on disclosure forms doesn't eliminate your responsibility to be truthful. When a seller drew lines through all disclosure questions, writing only that the property was tenant-occupied and he'd never lived there, he created a legal nightmare for himself. After discovering an unpermitted addition, the buyer backed out – but the seller kept the $300,000 deposit and sued for more. Though initially successful, the Court of Appeal reversed the decision, finding the seller knew about the problem and his line-crossing technique didn't absolve him of responsibility.The case highlights a critical point for anyone engaging in real estate transactions: disclosure forms are binding components of your contract. If you choose to complete one, everything you state (or strategically avoid stating) can have serious financial consequences. Sellers must either be meticulously accurate or explicitly mark properties as sold "as is" with no representations or warranties.In a separate ruling that exposes the troubling state of Indigenous child welfare, the Court restored a $150,000 human rights award to a First Nations mother who successfully proved discrimination by an Indigenous child protection agency. The statistics remain deeply concerning – Indigenous children represent a staggering 68% of those in government care despite comprising just 6% of BC's population. The case offers a glimpse into a system still struggling with its approach to Indigenous families.These rulings demonstrate how the courts continue to shape responsibilities in property transactions and protect human rights in child welfare matters. Whether you're buying, selling, or navigating family services, understanding these legal precedents could save you from costly mistakes or help you assert your rights when systems fail.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed.

What does it take to sentence a dog to death? Far less than you might think. In our latest deep dive into fascinating legal territory, we explore a heartbreaking case from Kamloops where a pit bull named Ferb faced the ultimate penalty under BC's dangerous dog laws. The story weaves through a tragic background - Ferb, stabbed five times as a puppy before being rescued, later found himself implicated in the killing of a neighbour's collie. What makes this case particularly compelling is how it illuminates the stark difference between animal and human justice systems. While humans receive the protection of "beyond a reasonable doubt," Ferb's life hung on the much lower "balance of probabilities" standard. Through expert testimony on pack mentality and circumstantial evidence, the court determined Ferb's fate in a process that raises profound questions about how we balance public safety against animal welfare.We also unpack a creative but unsuccessful class action against ICBC that claimed drivers were overcharged for cross-border liability insurance during COVID travel restrictions. The case's dismissal reveals the complex regulatory framework governing insurance rates and the limited recourse available to consumers who feel they've paid for services they couldn't legally use. Finally, we examine a fascinating business dispute involving proprietary nasal spray technology that demonstrates unique aspects of injunctive relief when enforcing negative covenants. Together, these cases paint a vivid picture of our legal system's intricate balance of competing interests and the frameworks created to resolve conflicts across vastly different contexts.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed.

The complex legal landscape of vicarious liability takes center stage in this illuminating discussion with Lawyer Michael Mulligan. At the heart of our conversation is a heartbreaking Victoria case where a retired teacher-turned-tutor sexually abused a grade six student, resulting in a $2.3 million judgment. We dissect the Court of Appeal's reasoning on why, despite creating the initial relationship, the school board wasn't held vicariously liable for the teacher's actions that occurred after retirement and away from school grounds.The legal principle at stake here affects countless institutions across Canada. While the abuse would never have occurred without the school's arrangement, the court determined this causal connection alone wasn't enough to establish liability. Tragically, with the perpetrator deceased, the victim's substantial judgment may go largely uncollected, demonstrating how technical legal distinctions can profoundly impact survivors' ability to receive compensation.We also examine two other rulings with everyday implications for Canadians. If you've ever missed your traffic court date due to illness, take note: the BC Supreme Court has confirmed doctor's notes aren't mandatory for appeals. Alternative evidence, like medication receipts or witness affidavits, can suffice – a welcome clarification that removes unnecessary barriers to justice.Looking toward our digital future, we analyze a split Supreme Court of Canada decision determining that 5G antennas don't qualify as "transmission lines" under telecommunications regulations. This seemingly technical ruling means telecom giants must now negotiate with individual municipalities to install the hundreds of thousands of small antennas needed for nationwide 5G coverage, potentially affecting the rollout of next-generation wireless technology in your neighbourhood.Have you encountered any of these legal issues? These cases highlight how judicial interpretations directly affect everything from institutional accountability to your traffic ticket disputes and even your cell phone reception.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed.

Navigating mental health crises poses profound challenges for families watching loved ones deteriorate without effective intervention options. This episode sheds light on a powerful yet underutilized legal tool - Section 28 of BC's Mental Health Act, which allows family members and concerned individuals to apply directly for a "warrant of apprehension" when someone exhibits dangerous mental health symptoms.A recent Colwood court judgment outlines exactly how this process works, revealing that applications have increased significantly recently. The warrant enables initial 48-hour detention for proper assessment when someone displays behaviour indicating they may harm themselves or others. We dissect the legal criteria judges consider: reasonable belief in mental disorder, need for treatment, purpose of protection, and inability to proceed voluntarily. This mechanism empowers families who previously felt helpless, though its effectiveness ultimately depends on available treatment facilities and mental health resources.We also examine two significant Court of Appeal decisions with far-reaching implications. First, a dangerous offender designation was upheld for an individual with decades of sexual offending against young boys, illustrating how the justice system handles those deemed to present an unmanageable risk to society. Second, a class action lawsuit against WestJet regarding passengers with disabilities who require multiple seats can proceed despite jurisdictional questions between federal transportation regulations and provincial discrimination laws. This fascinating exploration of "paramountcy" shows how courts attempt to harmonize seemingly conflicting legislation rather than automatically favouring federal authority. Have you encountered situations where knowledge of these legal mechanisms might have helped someone you know? We'd appreciate hearing your experiences.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed.

Privacy rights take center stage as the BC Court of Appeal delivers a powerful message to organizations handling sensitive information. When an ICBC employee sold policyholder data to criminal organizations, resulting in targeted arson and shooting attacks against numerous victims, the insurance giant fought tooth and nail to minimize compensation. The Court ultimately upheld a $15,000 award for each affected individual, establishing a crucial precedent that privacy violations cause significant harm even without visible damage.The ruling recognizes that having your personal details sold to criminals creates genuine suffering, even when physical attacks don't materialize. This landmark decision enforces the principle that employers bear responsibility for their employees' actions when handling sensitive data. For anyone concerned about their digital privacy, this case represents a significant step toward protecting personal information in an increasingly connected world.Meanwhile, the courts navigate the complex territory where art meets evidence. A murder trial in Surrey broke new ground by allowing expert testimony on drill rap—a subgenre where violent lyrics are often performative rather than autobiographical. The defence successfully argued that without understanding this cultural context, jurors might mistakenly interpret rap about violence as literal confessions. This raises fascinating questions about how we evaluate artistic expression in criminal proceedings and acknowledges potential racial biases in interpreting such content.In Victoria, justice persisted despite a defendant's violent refusal to participate in his own trial. Charged with beating someone with their own wheelchair during a robbery, the accused fought with sheriffs and refused to enter the courtroom. The judge's ruling that this behaviour constituted "absconding" demonstrates how our legal system adapts to maintain functionality even when faced with extreme disruption.These cases highlight how Canadian courts are evolving to address modern challenges while upholding fundamental principles of justice. Have you ever wondered how much your privacy is actually worth in the eyes of the law? This week's developments provide some compelling answers.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed. 

The boundaries between student life and financial freedom come under scrutiny in this fascinating examination of a groundbreaking Supreme Court of Canada decision. When does your status as a "student" truly end? According to Canada's highest court, returning to school—even part-time and self-funded—resets the seven-year countdown clock that protects government student loans from bankruptcy proceedings.Through a split 6-3 decision, the court delves into the subtle nuances of legal language, including how the French version of Canadian law influenced their interpretation. The case presents a sobering reality for those hoping to discharge student debt through bankruptcy: even brief returns to education could extend the period during which these loans remain protected, regardless of how many years have passed since the original borrowing.We also explore a high-profile Victoria murder case appeal that examines the legal distinction between different paths to first-degree murder charges. The court's analysis reveals how planning and deliberation carry a different standard of participation than murders committed during other serious offences like forcible confinement—a nuanced difference that upheld the conviction in this tragic case, where two escaped prisoners killed a man in his own home.The conversation concludes with an examination of what legally constitutes a "firearm" under Canadian law, determining that a handgun tested without its original magazine still qualifies as a firearm if it can function with alternative components. This technical but significant ruling emphasizes a weapon's capability over its specific configuration at the time of seizure.These cases collectively illuminate how judicial interpretation of seemingly straightforward legal language can profoundly impact real lives, whether determining the dischargeability of student debt, the severity of murder charges, or what constitutes a regulated weapon. Subscribe to hear more analyses of how the law affects everyday Canadians in unexpected ways.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed.

What happens when someone experiencing a psychotic episode intentionally crashes into a motorcyclist they believe is a "demon"? This fascinating exploration of mental illness and legal liability takes us through a landmark BC case that transforms how we understand responsibility when reality breaks down.The distinction between criminal and civil liability becomes crucial as we follow the story of a man with no prior psychiatric history who suffered a complete psychotic break in 2018. While criminal law might find him not responsible due to mental disorder, civil law focuses on compensation rather than punishment. The judge's nuanced approach reveals how liability extends beyond just the final moment of incapacity—examining the gradual deterioration that preceded the collision provides vital context for understanding accountability.This case carries profound implications for anyone interested in mental health advocacy, legal rights, and public safety. The court's finding of both negligence and battery resulted in a substantial award to the injured voice actor while also creating complex insurance issues since intentional acts typically aren't covered by policies. Perhaps most strikingly, the vehicle owner—the driver's then-girlfriend—was also held liable despite her desperate attempts to prevent him from driving once she realized his condition.We also delve into a separate but equally compelling case involving a Green Party deputy leader whose sentence for criminal contempt was reduced on appeal due to a misapplication of the "step-up principle." This illuminating example shows how judicial sentencing is constrained by legal principles that ensure proportionality and fairness rather than simply escalating punishments for repeated offences.Whether you're a legal professional, mental health advocate, or simply curious about how our justice system navigates these complex intersections, this episode offers valuable insights into how responsibility, compensation, and accountability function when mental capacity is compromised. Share your thoughts on these rulings and join the conversation about where personal responsibility begins and ends.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed.

The complex interplay between law, morality, and human tragedy takes center stage in our latest episode examining three compelling legal cases that highlight how our justice system navigates competing interests.We begin by exploring the "rescuer doctrine" - a legal principle establishing that if someone's negligence creates a dangerous situation, they can be liable for injuries sustained by those who attempt to help. This emerged in a heartrending case involving a woman who rushed to save a person whose wheelchair became stuck on railway tracks as a train approached. Despite her heroic efforts, she couldn't free the wheelchair in time, resulting in the death of the wheelchair user and injuries to herself. The railway company's attempts to avoid a jury trial were rejected by the judge, allowing this sympathetic rescuer to have her day in court.The tension between access to justice and financial realities takes shape in our second case, where a woman with limited means sought to appeal the dismissal of her medical malpractice claim. When the doctor requested she provide $5,000 security for potential legal costs, the court faced a dilemma: demanding full security might deny her right to appeal, while waiving it entirely would unfairly burden the doctor with legal expenses for what appeared to be a weak claim. The Court of Appeal struck a compromise, requiring just $1,000 security and extending the payment deadline - demonstrating how judges must sometimes find middle ground when principles collide.Finally, we delve into the emotionally charged issue of faith-based hospitals refusing to provide medical assistance in dying. When a terminal cancer patient had to be transferred from St. Paul's Hospital for MAID services, causing her additional suffering, it sparked litigation questioning whether religious exemptions can override patient rights. The case has attracted numerous interveners representing various perspectives, revealing how our courts manage cases with broad societal implications.Have you encountered situations where competing rights created difficult legal questions? Share your thoughts and join our conversation about how the justice system balances competing interests.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed.

Premier David Eby's partial retreat on the Economic Stabilization Tariff Response Act marks a significant moment in BC's response to US tariff threats. While the government has agreed to remove Part 4 of Bill 7—the section granting powers to amend legislation without parliamentary approval—legal expert Michael Mulligan reveals why serious concerns remain.The bill still contains provisions allowing the government to unilaterally cancel contracts, change procurement practices, and impose taxes without legislative debate. Particularly troubling is language that prevents affected parties from seeking judicial review of government actions—a fundamental protection in democratic systems. "Protection against legal proceedings" suggests the government wants to shield itself from court challenges, raising serious questions about accountability.Mulligan's analysis cuts to the heart of democratic governance: should we empower executives with unilateral authority, even during international disputes? He draws a striking parallel between the chaos of Trump's tariff decisions and the risks of BC's proposed response: "Left-wing populism is not a good response to right-wing populism." The comparison to Ontario Premier Doug Ford's hasty electricity tariff—quickly announced, then withdrawn—serves as a cautionary tale about reactive governance without deliberation.The remaining sections of Bill 7 grant more extensive powers than were used during the COVID-19 pandemic, despite facing only economic threats rather than a public health emergency. As Mulligan notes, "We are not at war with the United States." Want to understand the delicate balance between government authority and democratic safeguards? Listen to this essential breakdown of how emergency powers can fundamentally reshape governance when we're not looking closely enough.Follow this link for links to the legislation discussed.

The latest Legally Speaking segment with Michael Mulligan takes listeners on a fascinating journey through British Columbia's alternative dispute resolution landscape, revealing both promising innovations and concerning pitfalls in our justice system.The conversation begins with an extraordinary Civil Resolution Tribunal case in which a woman abandoned $95,000 of her $100,000 claim to proceed in a forum designed for minor disputes—only to lose everything. This cautionary tale illustrates the critical importance of forum selection and the permanent consequences of claim abandonment. Mulligan explains how the tribunal determined responsibility in a sophisticated WhatsApp fraud case, applying the principle of "who most enabled the third-party fraud" to conclude that ignoring explicit financial institution warnings proved fatal to the claim.Equally compelling is the examination of a Vancouver tenant's fight for $82,380 in compensation (twelve months' rent) from a landlord alleged to have never moved into a property after eviction. This high-stakes dispute raises constitutional questions about provincial tribunal jurisdiction while highlighting fundamental procedural fairness requirements that cannot be circumvented. When an adjudicator dismissed a key witness, imposed arbitrary time limits of just minutes for closing arguments, and failed to provide adequate hearing time, the Supreme Court intervened despite high thresholds for judicial review.These cases reveal the complex tensions within our legal system as it attempts to balance accessibility, efficiency, and fundamental fairness. Mulligan's expert analysis shows how legislative interventions in contractual relationships, particularly between landlords and tenants, have created increasingly fractured relationships, leading to novel litigation that tests the boundaries of our justice system.Ready to learn more about navigating legal disputes effectively? Subscribe to catch future episodes of Legally Speaking with Michael Mulligan, where complex legal concepts become accessible wisdom you can use to protect yourself in an increasingly complicated world.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed. 

Democracy stands at a crossroads in British Columbia as Michael Mulligan delivers a powerful analysis of the NDP's proposed Tariff Response Act (Bill C-7). Drawing on historical parallels that send shivers down the spine, Mulligan unpacks how this legislation bears troubling similarities to Nazi Germany's 1933 Enabling Act—legislation that effectively rendered their legislature irrelevant and set the stage for catastrophe.The bill's provisions would allow the government to make retroactive amendments to laws, shield officials from judicial review for procurement decisions, and potentially criminalize non-compliance with up to two years imprisonment. Most alarming is how the exclusion of the Offense Act creates a backdoor to criminal prosecution under Section 127 of the Criminal Code—potentially criminalizing actions that weren't illegal when performed. "The response to right-wing populism and erratic behaviour ought not to be a populist, left-wing, arbitrary response," Mulligan warns, as he urges Green Party MLAs who hold the balance of power to consider the weight of history before supporting such a transfer of power.In the second segment, Mulligan discusses a recent Victoria case with significant implications for homeowners and contractors. The court ruled that consumers can cancel construction contracts lacking specific completion dates within 12 months under the BC Business Practices and Consumer Protection Act. When a sunroom company demanded an additional $17,310 and dumped materials "the size of a small car" in a homeowner's driveway after cancellation, the judge ordered a full refund plus damages for trespass. Take note whether you're planning renovations or providing services—completion dates aren't just good business practice; they're legally required. Have you checked your contracts lately?Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed. 

A Canadian adult entertainment company faces an $850,000 fine after Health Canada's undercover operation exposed a lucrative scheme selling "natural health products" that secretly contained prescription medication. Michael Mulligan walks us through how MFH International Enterprises marketed pills called "Harmony" and "Passion Femme" as herbal alternatives while charging premium prices of nearly $140 for just 10 tablets. Health Canada's testing revealed these products contained triple doses of erectile dysfunction medications - putting unwitting consumers at serious risk, especially those with heart conditions.The case raises alarming questions about consumer safety in the natural health product market. As Mulligan points out, "Not everything natural is necessarily good for you," noting that even legitimately natural ingredients with exotic names like "horny goat weed" and "tomcat" deserve scrutiny. The court's substantial fine was carefully calculated to exceed the company's profits while remaining collectible over five years - though Mulligan questions whether corporate shell games might ultimately prevent full payment.The episode also examines a sobering reality about Canada's "not criminally responsible" verdicts. A man found NCR in 2012 for criminal harassment and uttering threats - offences that typically wouldn't result in lengthy prison terms - has now spent twelve years under involuntary psychiatric detention. His case starkly illustrates how NCR findings can lead to indefinite confinement rather than the "get out of jail free card" commonly assumed by the public.Closing with an analysis of British Columbia's proposed Economic Stabilization Act, Mulligan warns about delegating sweeping regulatory powers that bypass legislative debate. The bill would allow the government to rapidly impose tolls, fees, and restrictions through regulation alone - potentially creating chaotic policy shifts similar to what we've seen with international tariffs. While quick responses to economic challenges are appealing, Mulligan cautions that such broad authority demands careful consideration: "We should slow down... if you grant sweeping powers to do things which could seriously impact people's lives and livelihoods, sometimes you're going to cause serious harm."Note: Legally Speaking With Michael Mulligan is now live on CFAX 1070 at 12:30 pm rather than 10:30 am every Thursday. Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed.

The spectre of trade wars looms as social media announced tariffs threaten to disrupt the Canada-US relationship, but a powerful alternative to the traditional tit-for-tat approach exists. Rather than punishing ourselves with counter-tariffs that make goods more expensive for Canadians, we could follow Brazil's remarkably successful strategy from 2010.When faced with harmful US cotton subsidies, Brazil obtained WTO approval to suspend American intellectual property protections on pharmaceuticals, chemicals, and entertainment. The threat alone was so effective that the US  capitulated, passing corrective legislation and paying compensation. This approach targeted America's post-industrial economy, where true value lies not in manufacturing but in patents, copyrights, and intellectual property.Looking at our trade history, intellectual property protection forms the cornerstone of agreements from NAFTA to the 2020 USMCA. These agreements dramatically restricted Canada's generic drug industry, extended copyright terms to 75+ years, protected US semiconductor designs, and created digital IP frameworks that primarily benefit American companies. Since these protections exist because of the very agreements being violated through tariff threats, suspending them represents a logical and asymmetrical response.The beauty of this approach is its win-win nature for Canada – consumers would save substantially on medications, technology, and entertainment while applying maximum pressure to US interests. When auto executives warned of catastrophic consequences from parts tariffs, Trump backed down within 24 hours. Imagine the lobbying pressure from every pharmaceutical, technology, and entertainment giant facing the loss of their international intellectual property protections. As our legal expert notes, this approach has proven effectiveness has legal standing through WTO processes, and would target "most of the US economy" – making it a strategic option Canada shouldn't overlook as trade tensions escalate.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed.

Explore the intricate landscape of Canadian immigration law with us in this episode, where we unravel the surprising realities that can lead to deportation for long-term residents. Our primary focus is a captivating case involving a UK citizen who, after living in Canada for over 70 years, finds himself facing deportation due to organized criminality. The conversation sheds light on the legal definitions that can suddenly place an individual at risk, even for what may seem minor infractions.  Additionally, a heart-wrenching tale on an exploding stove illustrates the challenges individuals face within civil legal systems, highlighting the importance and protection that jury trials provide in civil matters.As we continue our discussion, we touch on the implications of harsh pre-trial conditions, showing how they may alter parole eligibility for those convicted of murder. Listeners are encouraged to consider the broader context of these legal decisions and how they intersect with mental health and personal histories. This rich dialogue not only educates about the law but also reflects wider societal values and challenges. Join us in this compelling conversation that not only informs but also provokes critical thinking on justice, fairness, and the legal hurdles many immigrants face. Don't miss out—subscribe, leave a review, and share your thoughts with us!Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed. 

What legal responsibilities do towns have when a simple stroll through a park turns tragic? Join us as we sit down with Michael Mulligan to uncover the layers of liability and negligence that come into play when public spaces fail to safeguard their visitors. Through the lens of a heart-wrenching case involving a young boy in Gibsons who became tetraplegic after a dead tree fell on him, we explore the critical question of whether the town fulfilled its duty of care under the Occupiers Liability Act. Michael helps us dissect the legal obligations and expectations placed on municipalities to ensure safety, including how standards like the Wildlife Danger Tree Assessors course influence these responsibilities.Pivoting to the realm of marine life, we navigate the murky waters of marine mammal regulations with a keen eye on a legal case that raises questions about the fairness of prosecution. When a woman was accused of disturbing killer whales while paddleboarding, it highlighted the labyrinth of modern legal statutes that can ensnare even the most well-meaning individuals. Michael guides us through this legal conundrum, addressing the principle that ignorance is no defence and the peculiar world of licensing fees for hunting marine mammals. We spotlight the legal processes, from evidence handling to upholding an individual's right to a fair trial, ensuring that justice remains not just a concept but a reality.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed.  

Unlock the secrets to challenging traffic citations and safeguarding your inheritance as we dissect intriguing legal scenarios from British Columbia. Ever wondered about the complexities behind those speed signs in construction zones? Discover how questioning their validity can shift the burden onto the Crown and how this impacts unsuspecting drivers. We'll shine a light on the legal presumptions that surround highway signage and discuss a recent case that brings these issues to the forefront, revealing the puzzling maze drivers might face when confronted with misleading or improperly erected signs.On a different note, we venture into the delicate balance of family obligations and government policy through the lens of a thought-provoking case involving a Henson Trust. What happens when a woman seeks to protect her $1.8 million inheritance while ensuring her eligibility for government benefits? Hear the compelling arguments and judicial decisions that question societal norms about wealth and public resource accessibility. Plus, we're joined by Michael Mulligan from Mulligan Defence Lawyers, who shares his expert legal insights, helping you navigate the complexities of these fascinating cases. Don't miss this opportunity to gain valuable perspectives from an experienced legal mind.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed. 

Prepare to challenge your understanding of Canadian law with our guest, Michael Mulligan, as we unravel three pivotal legal cases making headlines in British Columbia. First, we dissect a bold ruling where a BC judge declared the 25-year parole ineligibility for first-degree murder unconstitutional. This decision could transform the legal landscape, questioning whether longstanding standards align with modern constitutional rights. We explore the historical precedents, including the Supreme Court of Canada's 1990 Luxton decision, and consider the implications of evolving legal interpretations on future cases.Switching gears, we uncover the curious dismissal of a case due to a no-show Crown prosecutor, illustrating the intricate dance of jurisdiction between the BC Supreme Court and BC Provincial Court. With procedural nuances in the spotlight, we discuss historical instances like a Crown Counsel strike, shedding light on the complexities of prosecution duties. Lastly, we navigate through the latest developments in a class action lawsuit against HSBC, where allegations of mutual fund misrepresentation have sparked claims of unjust enrichment. Learn the crucial differences between actively and passively managed funds and why these distinctions matter to investors seeking value for their money. This episode promises a deep dive into the dynamic interplay of law and current events, offering insights that are both enlightening and thought-provoking.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed.

What if one impulsive moment could change a murder charge to manslaughter? Understanding the intricate nuances of Canadian law, we unpack the legal concept of provocation, especially its role in the justice system. Explore the far-reaching implications of the 2015 amendments under the Zero Tolerance for Barbaric Cultural Practices Act and the constitutional debates they spark. Discover a recent BC Court of Appeal case where a husband, embroiled in a complex narrative of alleged long-term abuse, challenges the application of these laws amidst claims of provocation.Tackle the vital theme of reputation and justice through a defamation case from Nanaimo, where false accusations against a city employee lead to a legal showdown. With insights from Michael Mulligan of Mulligan Defence Lawyers, we also scrutinize the Crown's disclosure obligations in criminal cases. Mulligan sheds light on the crucial responsibility to ensure fair trials by disclosing all pertinent information, even from different investigations. Join us for an enlightening discussion on these pressing legal issues, revealing their real-world impact and challenges.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed. 

Imagine being penalized for a simple screen touch while trying to make a living. Michael Mulligan of Mulligan Defence Lawyers joins us to unravel the outdated distracted driving laws that put gig economy drivers in a bind. Our conversation sheds light on how these regulations, which only permit screen interactions for phone calls, fail to consider today's work environment for gig workers like Uber Eats drivers. We highlight a noteworthy case where a driver was convicted for accepting a delivery, underscoring the urgent need for legislative reform. You'll also hear about some amusing quirks in the law, like the allowances for CB radio microphones, which highlight the disconnect between current laws and modern work practices.Switching focus to international trade, we explore the strategic dimensions of Canada's Digital Services Tax Act. This 3% levy on Canadian revenues of major US tech firms, such as Facebook and Amazon, is not just a tax—it's a diplomatic tool. We examine how this legislation fits into the larger geopolitical puzzle, especially in light of past US tariff threats. Conversations veer into the fascinating implications of raising the tax rate, arguing that these companies could still find profitability despite a higher levy. Moreover, we look at how other nations might follow suit, using similar measures to navigate trade tensions with the United States.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed.

Unlock the hidden power of intellectual property in global trade as we explore Canada's strategic maneuvers against US policies. Instead of traditional tariffs, imagine the impact of restricting US intellectual property rights on Canadian soil. Get ready to dissect a thrilling legal case over a $2 million lottery ticket—is it a solo jackpot or a group windfall? We unravel the details, from the tangled web of evidence to the burden of proof that could make or break the case.But the intrigue doesn't stop there. Brace yourself for the shocking story of a woman masquerading as a nurse in British Columbia, jeopardizing public trust with her deceitful actions. We'll navigate the legal complexities of her sentencing and the broader implications for the healthcare system. Plus, Michael Mulligan from Mulligan Defense Lawyers joins us to shed light on a school embroiled in a legal battle over a weed gummy incident, offering insights into the delicate handling of the situation. This episode promises a gripping journey through the multifaceted world of law and its profound consequences.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed. 

The episode dives into the intriguing dynamics between the United States and Canada, particularly surrounding trade and intellectual property (IP). As US President Donald Trump threatened tariffs on Canadian goods, a discussion emerged on how Canada could respond strategically. The central theme revolves around the underappreciated power of intellectual property as a bargaining chip in trade negotiations, particularly for a smaller nation like Canada. Michael Mulligan, a Barrister with Mulligan Defence Lawyers, emphasized that tariffs, often seen as the primary retaliatory measure, could ultimately harm Canadian consumers more than US producers. Understanding the intricate mechanisms of tariffs is key to grasping the broader consequences they can have on the economy. For instance, imposing a tariff on imported orange juice or motorcycles from the US would lead to inflated prices for Canadian consumers, while the US would experience only a minor economic sting. Thus, the discussion shifted toward a more sophisticated method of retaliation, focusing on IP laws established followin the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and its successor, the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA). Mulligan pointed out that the core of US-Canada trade discussions for many years has centred on IP protections, effectively making them a focal point of economic dependence.Mulligan explored real-world examples from Brazil and Antigua, which successfully leveraged their own IP protections in previous trade disputes with the US. Brazil's complaint regarding US cotton subsidies led to the approved threat of revoking US IP protections, which ultimately resulted in the US conceding to pay Brazil $130 million per year. Similarly, Antigua exploited online gambling disputes with the US, illustrating how the threat of losing IP protection led to fruitful negotiations. This approach illustrates how Canada might consider the strategic use of IP law to apply pressure on the US, particularly given the reliance of many American industries on these legal protections.The latter part of the episode transitioned dramatically into a more sombre topic: a first-degree murder case in Nanaimo. The gruesome details of the crime revealed a complex tapestry of intimate partner violence and the psychological implications associated with it. Michael discussed how the defendant's appeal to self-defence was complicated by the admissibility of expert evidence related to intimate partner violence. The case set off a significant dialogue about the complexities of legal definitions surrounding self-defence and the importance of integrating expert insights into judicial proceedings.The legal intricacies presented in the murder case add depth to the episode. The issue of admitting expert evidence played a crucial role, with the judge having to determine if the proposed testimony would be more prejudicial than probative. Mulligan explained that understanding the nuances of intimate partner violence can be vital to a fair trial, as conventional wisdom often fails to capture the complex emotional and psychological realities victims face. The juxtaposition of trade strategies and legal defences in murder cases provides a compelling lens through which to understand both the legal landscape and the very human stories behind it.Ultimately, this podcast episode not only sheds light on the legal frameworks governing trade but also emphasizes the ethical responsibilities of the legal system to understand and acknowledge trauma in criminal cases. It stands as a poignant reminder of how law intersects with both international affairs and personal struggles, illustrating the multifaceted nature of legal advocacy today.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed. 

Can a province truly bypass judicial processes in the name of housing development? Join us as we tackle this question with Michael Mulligan of Mulligan Defence Lawyers, providing his expert insights into a legal storm brewing over a proposed 12-story housing project in Vancouver's Kitsilano neighbourhood. This episode uncovers constitutional tensions as the provincial government attempts to circumvent judicial review, sparking a broader discussion about the limits of provincial power and the essential role of superior courts as outlined in section 96 of the Constitution Act 1867. Listen closely as we dissect the court's stance on rezoning requirements and the implications for due process.In another compelling narrative, we follow the legal fight for a young woman in foster care, spotlighting her struggle for adequate lifelong support against the backdrop of government-imposed financial caps. Delve into the province's contentious plan to offset compensation with potential aid from Community Living BC. At the same time, we introduce the novel "Peter's Promise" concept from the UK that challenges conventional compensation frameworks. Through this analysis, we emphasize the dignity and autonomy of individuals affected by legal decisions whilst navigating the uncertainties of relying on government support. Michael Mulligan's expertise brings clarity to these intricate issues, making this episode a must-listen for anyone interested in the dynamic interplay between law, community, and individual rights.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed.

Our conversation begins with a deep dive into the charge approval process for sexual assault, where we illuminate the nuances between the standards required for police arrests and those for Crown charge approvals. We tackle the challenge of relying solely on the versions of events provided by complaints due to the lack of independent witnesses or forensic evidence. Through a discussion on trauma-informed interviewing, we ponder its potential impact on case outcomes and highlight the importance of maintaining fairness by not labelling complainants as victims before trial proceedings.In the second half of the show, we tackle the sobering realities of hit-and-run cases. We explore an ICBC claim following a hit-and-run accident in Vancouver, emphasizing the importance of promptly and actively pursuing insurance coverage by identifying at-fault drivers rather than relying entirely on police investigations. To enrich this discussion, we welcome Michael Mulligan of Mulligan Defence Lawyers for his regular Legally Speaking segment, where he offers invaluable legal insights and expertise. Join us as we navigate these legal intricacies, offering you a rich understanding of the processes and implications at stake.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed.

Why did former Constable Ferris' questionable actions lead to a legal overturning of drug convictions, and what role did an inadequate defence play in this dramatic courtroom saga? Join us as we promise to unravel the complexities of police misconduct, discredited testimonies, and the impact of mental health on legal defence. With Michael Mulligan of Mulligan Defence Lawyers as our guide, we navigate through a case that underscores how fragile justice can be, hinging on the integrity of evidence and the robustness of representation. This is more than just a legal story—it's a reflection on trust in law enforcement and the resilience of the appeals process.We also explore a tangled web of inheritance and relationship status with profound implications for estate distribution. Was Sharon and Dick's companionship truly marriage-like, and how does this affect the legacy left behind? Michael Mulligan helps us dissect the judge's decision, which drew from intimate accounts of the couple's shared experiences rather than family skepticism. This episode highlights the critical need for clarity in wills, as we confront issues of spoliation and sibling contestation. Prepare for an engaging discussion that lays bare the subtle intricacies of human relationships and their legal ramifications.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed. 

Michael Mulligan from Mulligan Defence Lawyers joins us to untangle the intricate web of legal challenges sparked by personal entanglements within the courtroom. Imagine a scenario where a defence counsel's paralegal is romantically involved with the Crown counsel during a sexual assault trial. This isn't a plot twist from a legal drama, but a real-life case from Courtenay that led to a mistrial application, questioning the boundaries of professional ethics and the accused's right to know. We navigate through the complexities of this case, drawing parallels with precedents from Canada and the UK, and ponder the judge's authority to declare a mistrial post-conviction.Shifting our focus to Vancouver's courthouse, we confront the grim reality of operating in a neighbourhood plagued by violence and open drug use. Despite the Crown Counsel Association's plea for relocation, Attorney General David Eby's decision keeps the courthouse at its precarious location, raising concerns for all who walk its halls. The need for heightened security measures and the pressing call for addressing underlying social issues become glaringly apparent. As we wrap up, a seemingly trivial lawsuit over a $90 lens coating teaches us a valuable lesson about weighing the cost of legal battles. Michael Mulligan offers his perspective on exercising sound judgment before entering the legal fray, emphasizing the importance of picking one's battles wisely.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed. 

Unravel the complexities of the criminal justice system as we confront two captivating legal stories in this episode. We begin with the unsettling case of a man whose violent spree of stranger attacks led to a legal battle over his sentence. Despite a traumatic past and serious substance issues, the BC Court of Appeal upheld his seven-year sentence, prompting us to question the balance between justice and rehabilitation. Explore the legal principles of consecutive versus concurrent sentences and the totality principle while grappling with societal challenges around providing treatment and shelter to those who resist it.The second chapter plunges us into the murky waters of a decades-old murder case that left $30,000 hanging in a bureaucratic limbo. Discover how procedural oversights and jurisdictional disputes have kept this money in legal no-man's land since 1992. Michael Mulligan from Mulligan Defence Lawyers joins us, offering expert insights into the ethical and legal implications of dealing with assets tied to criminal activities. As we discuss the mishandling of seized property—like a forgotten cell phone—the importance of adhering to time limits becomes strikingly clear. Prepare for a thought-provoking journey through the intricacies of law and its impacts on society.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed. 

Experience an insightful journey through the complexities of the electoral process and the justice system with Michael Mulligan, Barrister and Solicitor at Mulligan Defence Lawyers. Ever wondered how a mere 27-vote difference can trigger a full judicial recount? This episode unravels the meticulous choreography behind recounts in the Surrey-Guilford Electoral District. Michael sheds light on how transparency and voter privacy are harmonized, the role of media in maintaining public confidence, and the captivating stories of disputed ballots where every mark counts.Switching gears, join us as we navigate through a high-stakes case in the Court of Appeal of the Yukon involving allegations of racial profiling during police stops. Discover the intertwining judicial framework between British Columbia and the Yukon and the challenges faced by a claimant attempting to prove systemic discrimination. Michael offers his expert perspective on why the court upheld the trial judge's decision and what this could mean for similar future claims. This episode is your chance to deepen your understanding of critical judicial processes and their profound impact on individuals and communities.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed. 

Discover the serious legal ramifications of fleeing from justice in our latest episode, where we promise to unravel the complexities of absconding from trial and inter-jurisdictional disputes. Join us as we dissect a compelling case from Canada involving a woman who, after facing charges of forging a passport application, fled to India mid-trial, leading to her conviction in absentia. Her attempts to appeal while abroad were denied. We also navigate the nuanced world of easements in British Columbia, focusing on a heated legal dispute over a navigation light easement impacting blackberry field owners. The principle of inter-jurisdictional immunity takes center stage, highlighting federal authority over aerodromes and shaping the court's decision to maintain the easement.Enhance your understanding of these legal intricacies with insights from Michael Mulligan of Mulligan Defence Lawyers. His expert commentary illuminates how these legal principles impact our daily lives, offering listeners practical advice and a deeper appreciation of the law's reach. Michael's engaging discussion provides clarity on complex issues, ensuring you're up-to-date with current legal trends. Tune in to gain a richer perspective on how legal matters influence both personal and broader societal contexts with an episode that promises to be as informative as it is fascinating.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed.

Get ready to uncover the intricacies of the legal system with Michael Mulligan from Mulligan Defence Lawyers as we dissect a fascinating case of breach of trust theft. Ever wondered why embezzling from an employer gets a harsher sentence than other types of theft? This episode promises to enlighten you on the significant emphasis courts place on general deterrence, especially when trust is violated. We break down the sentencing, guilty pleas, and the crucial distinction between serving time in a penitentiary versus house arrest.But that's not all! We also tackle the essential tools for debt collection—garnishing orders—exploring how creditors can secure payments even before a trial. Michael shares his expertise on maneuvering these legal remedies, their strategic application, and how to avoid the pitfalls of unpaid strata fees. Through captivating cases and expert insights, you'll learn the financial repercussions of neglecting obligations, and why responding promptly to strata fees is vital for communal harmony. Don't miss this engaging discussion that sheds light on the complexities of law, responsibility, and financial prudence.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed. 

What happens when a wealthy business owner disappears without a trace, leaving behind a tangled web of allegations, destroyed property, and unanswered questions? Join us as we explore this real-life mystery with expert insights from barrister and solicitor Michael Mulligan of Mulligan Defence Lawyers. We journey through the intricacies of the Presumption of Death Act, examining a case where millions in life insurance hinge on the final determination of a man's fate. From the eerie aftermath of a fire in his airplane hangar to the bizarre silence of his bank accounts, the case presents a fascinating puzzle full of legal and investigative challenges.The episode takes an unexpected twist as we navigate the legal repercussions that arise if someone presumed dead were to reappear while also dissecting the nuances of Canadian law concerning police interrogations and the right to counsel. We also delve into a Court of Appeal case that revisits a first-degree murder trial due to the mishandling of a confession, emphasizing the critical importance of voluntariness in legal proceedings. Through these complex legal landscapes, listeners gain a deeper understanding of how justice is pursued and the vital role of law in unravelling mysteries. Tune in for a thought-provoking episode that promises to leave you with more questions than answers.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discssed. 

Ever wondered how a judicial recount can flip an election result on its head? Join us as Michael Mulligan, a seasoned barrister and solicitor with Mulligan Defence Lawyers, unravels the complexities of vote counting and recounts in Canadian elections. You'll gain unique insights into the procedures that follow the so-called "final count" and the very narrow margins that necessitate a mandatory recount. With captivating examples from the 2020 BC election and earlier federal contests, Michael illustrates how recounts can alter initial leads dramatically, revealing the fragility and volatility of election outcomes. As if elections weren't complex enough, we switch gears to dissect the ongoing legal battles over cow sharing in British Columbia. Despite attempts to navigate through loopholes for raw milk consumption, the courts have upheld prohibitions against it. Michael provides a compelling narrative that highlights why this practice, while potentially viable in other provinces, remains contentious in BC. Tune in for an episode brimming with insightful legal stories that might just change the way you view electoral processes and cow ownership.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed.

Unlock the secrets of British Columbia's electoral process as we journey through the intricacies of the Election Act with the knowledgeable Michael Mulligan from Mulligan Defence Lawyers. We'll explore how the act paves the way for an inclusive voting experience, spotlighting innovative measures like tele-assisted voting for individuals with disabilities and accommodations for voters with mobility challenges. The episode reveals how the integrity of our elections is upheld through systems that allow for challenging voter eligibility, ensuring that every voice is heard without compromise. Take a step back in history with us as we examine the unique relationship between voting, prohibition, and the birth of the Liquor Control Licensing Branch in BC. Michael Mulligan sheds light on the fascinating, and sometimes quirky, legacies of the past that continue to influence the province today. From the intricacies of special ballots to the serious repercussions of corrupt voting practices, discover how modern technology secures the electoral process with offline voting machines while still accommodating regional flexibility. Join us for a revealing look at the Election Act's impact on democracy in British Columbia, and the ongoing commitment to maintaining a fair and accessible voting system for all citizens.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the legislation discussed.  

Can you really shoot a dog to save your chickens? We unravel this legal conundrum with the expert insights of Michael Mulligan, a seasoned barrister and solicitor from Mulligan Defence Lawyers. Mulligan helps us dissect the latest criminal justice reform proposals from the BC election campaign, including the prospect of hiring more sheriffs and judges to alleviate court backlogs. Together, we weigh the importance of a comprehensive strategy that also considers the roles of Crown counsel, court clerks, and legal aid. Plus, we look at the intriguing suggestion of a statutory court for minor offenses and the potential impact of such reforms on the justice system's efficiency.In another fascinating segment, we're exploring property rights, animal protection laws, and the nuances of easement rights. Mulligan sheds light on a real-life case where a man's attempt to defend his chickens led to legal repercussions. We navigate the complexities of the British Columbia Livestock Act, the Farm Practices Protection Act, and how these laws influenced the case. Shifting focus to North Saanich, we decode a court ruling on easement rights and the responsibilities they entail, illustrating the legal intricacies property owners face. This episode promises a thought-provoking journey through law and justice, raising important questions about rights and responsibilities.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed. 

What happens when a seemingly straightforward hunting trip turns into a legal conundrum over age determination and strict liability offences? Join us as we unpack the captivating case of the Massey Ram. Michael Mulligan from Mulligan Defence Lawyers sheds light on how hunters can find themselves in hot water under the Wildlife Act, and why counting horn annuli is not as straightforward as it seems. We unravel the complexities of distinguishing between criminal and strict liability offences and explore the intriguing defence of due diligence using relatable examples like speeding.Ever wondered about the ripple effects of handling a traffic ticket? Hear the cautionary tale of a commercial truck driver whose career took an unexpected turn after a simple payment. We dig into the implications of equating ticket payment with a guilty plea and the arduous journey of appealing a conviction past its deadline. And, in a recent Vancouver legal case regarding tree removal in a local park, we dissect why a judge ruled against a park injunction despite public concerns. This episode promises an enlightening journey through the intricate world of legal regulations, duty of care, and the far-reaching consequences of seemingly minor decisions.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed.

Can we really ensure the safety and dignity of elderly care facility residents when young adults with severe mental health and addiction issues are placed among them? This episode exposes the unsettling reality in Victoria and Nanaimo, where vulnerable elderly individuals share long-term care homes with younger adults facing significant challenges. We break down the legal ramifications, analyze the Resident's Bill of Rights, and reveal shocking staff reports of drug use, violence, and inadequate staffing. The lack of enforcement mechanisms leaves elderly residents defenceless, sparking a crucial conversation about the need for alternative facilities.Shifting gears, we also tackle the complex world of Canadian criminal law, specifically focusing on out-of-court statements. What circumstances make these statements admissible, and how reliable are they? With examples like dying declarations and res gestae, we explore the stringent criteria judges use to weigh their validity. A landmark Supreme Court of Canada case involving a pellet gun and the scrutiny of a statement's reliability provides a riveting backdrop. Join us as we demystify common misconceptions about police statements, highlighting that true justice hinges on solid witness testimonies in court.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed.

Are machetes the next weapon to be banned in Canada? Join us as we dissect the provincial NDP Attorney General's request to the federal government following a tragic attack in Vancouver. We'll scrutinize the effectiveness of recent bail reforms and explore the peculiarities of Canada's current weapon prohibitions, including some surprising bans on items like nunchucks and certain missile launchers. Additionally, we delve into the federal government's controversial firearm buyback program, questioning the logic and execution behind these sweeping legislative measures.In our second segment, we turn our attention to the mandatory Indigenous training course for the Law Society, which has ignited a heated debate over the accuracy of claims that bodies were located at the  Kamloops Indian Residential School. We analyze a recent BC Court of Appeal decision and its broader societal implications, touching on the political dynamics at play. Finally, we welcome legal expert Michael Mulligan for an insightful conversation, offering thoughtful analysis and practical advice on an array of legal topics. If you're eager to understand the complexities of current legal issues from knowledgeable perspectives, this episode is a must-listen.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed.

Curious about the legalities that surround everyday mishaps? Join us as we explore these fascinating topics with Michael Mulligan, a seasoned Barrister and Solicitor from Mulligan Defence Lawyers. We kick off by dissecting a real-life incident where a woman sustained serious injuries after tripping in a pothole at a 7-Eleven parking lot. Michael offers a deep dive into the Occupiers Liability Act in British Columbia, emphasizing the critical need for a reasonable system of inspections and maintenance to counter negligence claims. We'll also touch on the nuances of exceptions, such as for trespassers and specific rural or recreational properties.Our discussion then shifts to a compelling estate dispute involving a father's will and his three daughters. The youngest daughter, despite being raised in a well-off environment by her aunt and uncle, felt emotionally abandoned by her biological father. This emotional complexity led to a court decision enforcing equal distribution among the daughters, stressing the moral obligation of adequate support. Wrapping up, we discuss the responsibilities of Judicial Case Managers in the Provincial Court. Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discssed.

Discover the hidden cracks in British Columbia's mental health system as we dissect a recent tragic case in Vancouver that underscores systemic failures. Despite the Mental Health Act's provisions, inadequate resources and treatment facilities have left many vulnerable individuals untreated and homeless. We'll explore the urgent need for proactive measures and discuss how addressing mental health issues is paramount for both public safety and humane treatment.Is the bail system in BC failing those in crisis? We scrutinize the strain on emergency departments and police resources, especially regarding mental health emergencies. Our conversation goes beyond the limitations of bail as a reactive measure and calls for a comprehensive overhaul of the system. Hear about a poignant civil case involving a police dog attack during a domestic dispute, adding another layer to the complexities of our current public safety practices.Unravel the complexities of legal disputes and interim injunctions with our expert guest, Michael Mulligan, from Mulligan Defence Lawyers. We break down the three-part test for injunctions and the unique considerations in trespass cases, shedding light on why summary trials falter when facts are contested. Using an intriguing case about a lime green Porsche, we'll illustrate the challenges judges face in resolving disputes efficiently. Don't miss this enlightening discussion on the nuances of the legal system and how it impacts real-life cases.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed. 

Can changing bail laws solve the epidemic of drug addiction and mental illness plaguing British Columbia? Join us as Michael Mulligan challenges the status quo, making the case that the province's focus on bail reform is a misstep. Instead, Mulligan argues for a more holistic approach that prioritizes comprehensive treatment resources to tackle the roots of criminal behavior. Through a critical analysis of current policies, we uncover why simply altering the bail system won't lead to a significant reduction in crime or social disorder.In our exploration, we examine a heartbreaking case from Surrey, shedding light on the daunting decisions judges face during bail hearings. The episode delves into the difficult balance between public safety and individual rights when dealing with offenders who have violent histories and mental health issues. We scrutinize the political ramifications of public outrage over repeat offenders and discuss the need for reform in drug treatment policies, stressing the inadequacies of the current system. This conversation is essential for understanding the broader social issues at play and the real challenges in addressing crime through the legal system alone.Lastly, we turn our attention to the complexities of inheritance laws in British Columbia, focusing on a recent contested will case that underscores the importance of fair asset distribution. Highlighting Section 60 of the Wills Estates and Succession Act, we discuss how courts can intervene to ensure just support for spouses or children, even when traditional values clash with modern expectations. This segment offers valuable insights into careful estate planning, illustrating how to prevent legal disputes and ensure that your final wishes are respected and honored. Whether you're interested in legal reform, social justice, or family law, this episode promises to be both enlightening and thought-provoking.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed.

Ever wondered how a simple oversight can cost thousands in the legal world? Join us in this episode of Legally Speaking as we examine a pivotal case in the Canadian criminal justice system where the Crown's failure to hand over essential police notes in an impaired driving case led to a hefty financial penalty. We delve into the consequences of this negligence, including a rare ruling for costs on appeal, highlighting the critical importance of complete and timely disclosure in ensuring justice. You'll also get an insider's perspective on the high stakes involved and the potential financial fallout when legal obligations are not met. Shifting to family law, we navigate the complexities of a traditional Iranian marriage agreement contested in British Columbia courts. Learn how the judge balanced the maher, or marriage portion, with typical family law considerations to reach a fair decision. We'll also discuss a significant civil case against a well-known coffee chain, focusing on the Occupiers Liability Act. To wrap up, we welcome Michael Mulligan from Mulligan Defence Lawyers, who offers his expert insights on the stark differences in disclosure practices between civil and criminal cases. This episode is brimming with legal intrigue and detailed analysis that you won't want to miss.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed. 

Ever wondered how far the boundaries of solicitor-client privilege extend? Join us in a riveting conversation with Michael Mulligan from Mulligan Defence Lawyers as we explore the critical nuances of wiretaps and lawyer-client communications. Starting with a fascinating case from Saskatchewan, we uncover the story of a lawyer acquitted of obstruction of justice for allegedly tipping off a client about a search warrant. This episode promises an in-depth understanding of the stringent requirements for intercepting private communications in Canada, especially those involving lawyers, and emphasizes the pivotal role of legal provisions designed to protect privileged conversations.We'll also dissect the British Columbia NDP government's contentious efforts to regulate lawyers through the Legal Professions Act, juxtaposed against the long-standing independence of the Law Society of British Columbia. Finally, you'll gain insights into a judicial ruling about the enforceability of illegal contracts, with expert commentary from Michael Mulligan on why invoices tied to illegal schemes are not upheld in court. This episode is packed with critical legal insights and serves as a compelling reminder of the importance of adhering to legal and ethical standards in professional dealings.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed. 

What if the justice system could truly hold police accountable? Explore the intricate and troubling case from Prince George, starting with a tragic encounter between an Indigenous man and RCMP officers that led to his death. We'll unravel the story of a bystander's crucial video evidence, its controversial deletion, and the ensuing legal battles that spotlight the need for judicial transparency and independent investigations.Two RCMP officers faced obstruction of justice charges. One officer's unconvincing testimony led to an acquittal, while a rookie officer's manifest dishonesty resulted in his conviction. Michael Mulligan of Mulligan Defence Lawyers joins us to provide expert analysis on the fine line between doubt and guilt, the complexities of police interactions with personal cell phones, and the preservation of evidence.Our final chapters shift to financial and judicial complexities. A BC couple leaves vulnerable investors in ruins and declares bankruptcy to avoid paying a multi-million dollar penalty. The Supreme Court of Canada concludes that some, but not all, debts related to the case survived bankruptcy. Mulligan breaks down how the law navigates these high-stakes scenarios, ensuring that listeners walk away with a nuanced understanding of these pivotal legal issues. Don't miss out on this comprehensive and insightful episode!Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed.  

How can courtroom chaos lead to a year-long prison sentence being overturned? Discover the riveting story of a man's disruptive behaviour during his trial that led to a contempt conviction. Find out why his relentless pseudo-legal arguments and interruptions didn't hold up as the Court of Appeal stepped in to reverse the decision. We break down the different forms of contempt of court, focusing on incidents that occur directly in the courtroom, and explore the fine line between maintaining order and upholding justice.But that's not all—we also delve into the harrowing case of a woman who endured severe complications from a broken epidural needle during childbirth. This segment uncovers the essential elements of a medical negligence claim, such as duty of care and causation of damages, and highlights the stakes involved in medical equipment manufacturing. Plus, we tackle the legal framework surrounding police seizure of evidence, striking a balance between law enforcement needs and individual rights. Don't miss our legal discussion with Michael Mulligan from Mulligan Defence Lawyers, who offers his expert insights on current legal issues that could affect your life.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed. 

What happens when a tragic act of violence intersects with mental illness and substance abuse? Join us on Legally Speaking as we unpack the heart-wrenching case of a 25-year-old Indigenous man in Trail, BC, who fatally attacked a 78-year-old stranger. This episode challenges the simplistic narrative of violent acts as mere bail system failures. We scrutinize the court's decision to convict the man of manslaughter instead of murder, shedding light on the significant role his mental state and drug-induced delusions played. Through this lens, we explore the deeper societal and systemic issues that contribute to such incidents, advocating for a more nuanced understanding and approach.In another compelling segment, we dissect a wrongful dismissal case involving a 31-year-old software developer, highlighting the complexities of employment contracts and the critical role of consideration. Discover how an initial detailed email outlining job specifics was upheld over a subsequent, less substantial letter, resulting in a favourable court ruling for the employee. This discussion underscores the importance of clear and fair employment terms, and why understanding the intricacies of employment law can make or break your case. Whether you're an employer, employee, or simply curious about the legal world, this episode is packed with insights that resonate beyond the courtroom.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed.

What happens when the law collides with contentious family decisions and public safety? Join us as we sit down with Michael Mulligan, a barrister and solicitor from Mulligan Defence Lawyers, to dissect a variety of complex legal scenarios. From the stringent criteria required to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada to a severe sentence handed down in Ontario for driving while disqualified, we explore the heavy legal consequences that can arise from repeated offences. This episode sheds light on British Columbia's stringent driving prohibition laws, illustrating how infractions can lead to significant penalties.Have you ever wondered how the courts handle parental disputes over medical decisions for their children? We dive into a heated legal battle in British Columbia, where separated parents clashed over their daughter's HPV vaccination. While the mother championed the vaccine for its cancer-preventing benefits, the father opposed it, influenced by dubious online sources. Through the lens of Section 49 of the Family Law Act, Michael Mulligan discusses how the judge ultimately ruled in favour of the mother, underscoring the importance of credible evidence and the overwhelming benefits of the HPV vaccine.Finally, we examine two pivotal cases that underscore the importance of evidence-based decision-making. Discover how a judge mandated a child's vaccination, overriding a father's objections rooted in internet misinformation, and the implications of this decision. We also explore a case involving an 80-year-old man who was required to retake a driving test following a cognitive assessment despite a subsequent higher score. This episode highlights the delicate balance between individual rights and societal safety, with expert insights from Michael Mulligan that you won't want to miss.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed. 

Can employers terminate employees without cause, and what are the legal nuances involved? Michael Mulligan from Mulligan Defence Lawyers to unravel a recent Court of Appeal decision in British Columbia surrounding wrongful dismissal, notice, and an employment contract. We dissect the case of a senior employee from Harbour Air Seaplanes who was let go during the COVID-19 pandemic and examine how the interplay between federal legislation and common law could  influence compensation beyond the statutory minimums.But that's not all. We also tackle the significant ramifications of a landmark Supreme Court of Canada ruling on language rights in criminal courts. This decision, stemming from a British Columbia case, mandates judges to ensure accused individuals are informed of their language rights, causing a ripple effect throughout the judicial system. Finally, we delve into liability issues under the BC Wildfire Act, spotlighting a judicial review that overturned hefty penalties for a man whose extinguished fire reignited. This episode promises a comprehensive tour through pressing legal landscapes, from employment law to language rights and wildfire liability.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed.

What happens when the right to a fair and public trial clashes with the need to protect informer confidentiality? This episode of our podcast takes you through a riveting journey into the complex world of informer privilege and the right to a transparent judicial process. We scrutinize a landmark Supreme Court of Canada decision involving a secret trial in Quebec, where the Quebec Court of Appeal overturned the conviction due to abuse of process. Michael Mulligan from Mulligan Defence Lawyers joins us to dissect the intricate legal principles at play and ponder the broader implications for justice and transparency in Canada.But that's not all. We'll also cover a gripping case from the BC Court of Appeal, where a woman was awarded over $1 million in damages after being struck by a hockey puck. This case exemplifies the intricacies of personal injury law, highlighting the challenges in compensating for lost future income and non-pecuniary damages. With expert insights from Michael Mulligan, our discussion provides a comprehensive look at these pivotal cases, offering a deeper understanding of the Canadian justice system's complexities and the ongoing tension between individual rights and public interest.Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed.