Podcasts about british columbia court

(SEALING ORDER) (CERTAIN INFORMATION NOT AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC) The appellant, Tammy Marion Bouvette, was babysitting a 19-month old baby who died while having a bath. An autopsy was conducted by Dr. Evan Matshes. The appellant was charged with second degree murder. The appellant pleaded guilty to criminal negligence causing death. The British Columbia Court of Appeal concluded that a body of relevant information was within the possession of the Crown and/or police and was not disclosed to the appellant's counsel. Most significantly, the undisclosed evidence pertained to the reliability of the evidence and opinions of Dr. Matshes. The Court of Appeal held that the conviction must be set aside as the product of a miscarriage of justice, as the evidence and circumstances establish a reasonable possibility that the appellant would not have pleaded guilty to criminal negligence causing death had full disclosure been made. The Court of Appeal admitted the fresh evidence, allowed the appeal, vacated the guilty plea, set aside the conviction and entered a stay of proceedings. Argued Date 2024-11-14 Keywords Criminal law — Appeals — Powers of the Court of Appeal — Setting aside guilty plea when there has been a miscarriage of justice — Scope of appellate courts' remedial discretion under s. 686(2) of the Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, to enter an acquittal — Did the Court of Appeal err in finding that the entirety of the record as amplified on appeal admits the reasonable possibility of a conviction on a theoretical retrial? — If there remains a reasonable possibility of a conviction on a retrial, does s. 686(2)(a) nevertheless permit a court of appeal to enter an acquittal and, if so, in what circumstances? Notes (British Columbia) (Criminal) (By Leave) (Sealing order) (Certain information not available to the public) Language English Audio Disclaimers This podcast is created as a public service to promote public access and awareness of the workings of Canada's highest court. It is not affiliated with or endorsed by the Court. The original version of this hearing may be found on the Supreme Court of Canada's website. The above case summary was prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch).

Nestled in the foothills of the Canadian Rockies in southern Alberta lies the small town of Pincher Creek.  With a population of just under 4,000, Pincher Creek has the distinction of being the “Wind Capital of Canada.”  It is perhaps better known as the birthplace and hometown of the Right Honorable Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin, the longest serving Chief Justice of Canada's Supreme Court.Despite being told by her 8th grade teacher that her aptitude for reading wouldn't do her much good as a girl, Chief Justice McLachlin went on to study philosophy and eventually law at the University of Alberta.  Upon graduating with high honors, she spent six years in private practice and then turned to academia, teaching at the University of British Columbia for seven years.  At age 37, she received her first judicial appointment to the Vancouver County Court.  Could she have imagined the significance of this life changing moment?  Over the next eight years, from 1981 to 1989, Justice McLachlin was on the rise!  She was appointed to the Supreme Court of British Columbia, the British Columbia Court of Appeals, made Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of British Columbia, and in March 1989, she was appointed to the Supreme Court of Canada. Her highest honor came in the year 2000 when she was appointed Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada, a role she held for 17 years, making her the longest serving Chief Justice in Canada's history.    Chief Justice McLachlin's legacy cannot be adequately cataloged.  During her tenure on the Supreme Court, she authored over 400 majority opinions on the most consequential matters of legal interpretation under Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms, including assistance in dying, the criminalization of prostitution, equality, free speech, and aboriginal rights.Resources:Truth Be Told: The Story of My Life and My Fight for Equality, Beverley McLachlinFull Disclosure: A Novel, Beverley McLachlinHer Honor: Stories of Challenge and Triumph from Women JudgesThe Persons CaseSupport this podcast by subscribing and reviewing!Music is considered “royalty-free” and discovered on Audio Blocks.Technical Podcast Support by: Jon Keur at Wayfare Recording Co.© 2023 Silver Linings Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Aaron Pete and Nikos Harris discuss criminal law, justice, mandatory minimum sentencing, Peter A. Allard School of Law, and education. Nikos Harris is an award-winning professor who also has extensive experience as appellate counsel. He has authored numerous articles on issues in criminal law and evidence, and his writing has been cited in a number of trial and appellate judgments. Nikos has served as a guest speaker for a number of organizations including Continuing Legal Education, the Trial Lawyers Association, and Crown Counsel of British Columbia. He is also is an advocacy advisor for the Supreme Court Advocacy Institute which assists counsel in preparing submissions for the Supreme Court of Canada. Nikos served as a judicial clerk at the British Columbia Court of Appeal and was a Raymond Herbert Award recipient. Watch on YouTube: https://youtu.be/nxhHemXwMDM Listen on Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/7jl39CsCYhImbLevAF6aTe?si=dc4479f225ff440b Listen on Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/bigger-than-me-podcast/id1517645921 Listen on Google Podcasts: https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5idXp6c3Byb3V0LmNvbS8xMDc3MjYyLnJzcw?sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiA8JKF2tT0AhUPmp4KHR2rAPkQ9sEGegQIARAC Subscribe to the Newsletter: https://aaronpete.substack.com/ Chapters: 0:00:00 Choosing Law as a Career 0:24:37 Sharing Your Passion 0:30:33 The Canadian Criminal Justice System 0:58:44 What is Justice? 1:17:25 Judges 1:45:43 White Collar Crimes 2:08:30 Inspiring Students

The vast majority of self-represented litigants cannot afford full representation in legal services – and yet most of them are continuing to search for assistance that is affordable to them. In this episode, Julie speaks with Marcus Sixta, of CrossRoads Law, about his pioneering legal coaching practice, Coach My Case. Marcus is a leading innovator in the development of legal services that are tailored to client needs and pocket books, such as offering different tiers of assistance and working collaboratively to assess and meet needs. He believes in utilizing the skills of paralegals and lawyers, as well as a range of services, from procedural navigation, to issue identification, to hearings coaching. Leona Harvie, who provides the reflection in this episode, is a former self-represented litigant who now works as a divorce coach, providing support and legal information to family law clients. She can be found at letstalkdivorcecanada.com and on Instagram where her handle is letstalkdivorcecanada. NSRLP has been developing a National Directory of Professionals Assisting Self-Represented Litigants since 2016; it contains the names and details of professionals across the country who offer legal coaching. In Other News: This week our In Other News Correspondent is Research Assistant Charlotte Sullivan. This week Charlotte discusses: the Attorney General of British Columbia announcing new rules of procedure for the British Columbia Court of Appeal; a piece on parental relocation cases in family law; and the controversial Bill 96, recently passed by the National Assembly of Québec. For related links and more on this episode visit our website: https://representingyourselfcanada.com/you-drive-the-bus-with-a-coach-in-your-corner/ Jumping Off the Ivory Tower is produced and hosted by Julie Macfarlane and Dayna Cornwall; production and editing by Brauntë Petric; Other News produced and hosted by Charlotte Sullivan; promotion by Moya McAlister and the NSRLP team.

This is Toby Sumpter with your CrossPolitic Daily News Brief for Tuesday, March 23, 2021. And we're back… Today you will hear a bunch about Gov. Kristi Noem's partial veto of the South Dakota legislature's tranny bill. Calls continue for Gov. Cuomo to step down, and a father is in jail in Canada for using the wrong pronouns.  School year's end is in sight. Homeschoolers are evaluating; private school students know finals are coming. Math and science can be the toughest subjects for students and their parents. Instead of running to resources that disagree with your faith at every turn, how about hiring a reformed, Bible-believing, Creationist who can supplement both your child's science and math needs as well as their faith? Mr. Klunick Tutoring assists parents in their God-given responsibility to educate their children according to His word in every area of their lives by delivering science teaching built on the Bible. Visit mrklunicktutoring.com. And if you or your business would like to advertise with CrossPolitic, send inquiries to Ads@FightLaughFeast.com  Gov. Noem Partially Veto's a Bill She Said She Looked Forward to Signing https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/544241-kristi-noem-rejects-signing-transgender-sports-bill South Dakota's GOP governor declined on Friday to sign a bill from legislators in her own party that would have banned transgender girls from participating in women's high school and college sports. In a statement released on Twitter, Noem said that she was sending the bill back to lawmakers for changes, and indicated that she thought the ban should not be extended to college athletes. "Unfortunately, as I have studied this legislation and conferred with legal experts over the past several days, I have become concerned that this bill's vague and overly broad language could have significant unintended consequences," Noem wrote. "I am also concerned that the approach House Bill 1217 takes is unrealistic in the context of collegiate athletics," she added, writing that banning transgender athletes from collegiate sports would cause conflict with national college athletic associations (NCAA). Michael Ferris, CEO of Alliance Defending Freedom, Chairman of the HomeSchool Legal Defense Association, and Chancellor Emeritus of Patrick Henry College was among the first conservatives to call “Foul!”  On Facebook, Ferris wrote:  “Kristi Noem, the REPUBLICAN Governor of South Dakota, has just vetoed portions of the Save Women's Sports bill in her state.  Girls sports are saved for high school. But because of her veto men can now play women's sports in college. And she took out the enforcement clause for high school sports. It is clear that she bowed to the pressure from Amazon (which is supposed to be building a new facility in South Dakota) and the NCAA.  She was considered a shining star in the GOP with a bright future. No more.  We don't need leaders who lack the courage to stand up to the corporate bullies who want to turn our country into an amoral wasteland filled with compliant consumers.  Republican leaders count on people like us to help elect them. With leaders like this it makes the need for a new political alignment all the more acute.  South Dakota deserves better. All of America deserves better. ADDITION IN RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS: Gov. Noem's criticisms of the bill can be broken down into 3 basic points.  1. She didn't want the bill to apply to college athletics.  2. She didn't want high school girls whose rights were violated to have the right to sue.  3. She had some technical amendments about drug testing etc.  Keep in mind that after the Senate passed the bill, she tweeted that she looked forward to signing the legislation.  The normal way a friendly Governor works with the legislature on a bill is to raise concerns before the bill passes. Then the legislators can make changes if agreed. She said nothing until the bill was passed and again, she had previously promised to sign it when all these things were already in the bill.  She could have easily cured any technical problems in this fashion.  But the plain fact is she threw college athletics under the bus. And she robbed the rule protecting high school girls of any real power by taking away the right to sue.  I have worked on legislation for over 40 years. These are not the actions of a Governor who wants a robust bill to pass. She broke her promise.” That was Friday, March 19th. On Saturday, Ferris wrote on Facebook again: “More on Governor Noem's Partial Veto of the Save Women's Sports Bill Yesterday, I criticized Governor Noem's decision to not protect women's college athletes from biological males who decide to compete as females.  The Governor has tried to create the implication that the NCAA forced the state's hand. (see the photo of her tweet.)  The only way this could be true is if the NCAA required member institutions to admit transgender athletes on female teams.  The second photo is of the NCAA website. This makes it absolutely clear that the rule PERMITS universities to include transgendered athletes under certain conditions BUT IT NEVER REQUIRES ANY SCHOOL OR COACH TO DO SO.  Governor Noem was under no obligation from the NCAA to issue her veto.  This is abundantly obvious because many religious colleges are also members of the NCAA. And there is no way that it is seeking to force such religious schools to include transgender athletes on their teams.  Governor Noem was not forced to make this decision. She made it because she wanted to.  Her excuses ring hollow. There is no 50 state policy—except this: every school and state gets to decide for itself.  She originally promised to sign this bill. She changed her mind after intense pressure from business interests.  All of us are going to have to choose. Will we let corporate interests dictate the moral and social policy of this country? I say NO.” Then on Monday, Noem came out swinging with a press conference defending her decision, along with a DefendTitleIXNow.com coalition announcement. Heavy weight Former NFL Star Herschel Walker was among others on hand to defend Gov. Noem and her Defend Title IX Now coaltion.  https://www.facebook.com/govnoem/videos/302511984551411 0:50-2:00 – put simply  3:40-4:16 – feel good or do good? 5:31-7:14 Suing NCAA & Defend Title IX Now.com Rally Plug Have you registered for the Fight Laugh Feast Rally in Rapid City, South Dakota, April 29, 30, May 1? Gov. Kristi Noem was the only Governor in the Union not to overstep her authority. We want to support her and we want to encourage you wherever you are. Many churches are not meeting, many Christians feel alone. But you're not alone. So the theme of the Rally in South Dakota is Love God, Sing Psalms, Defy Tyrants. Come hear talks from Pastor Doug Wilson, Ben Merkle, Steve Deace, Sheriff Daryl Wheeler from Bonner County, Idaho, myself – and hot off the presses, Pastor Joe Boot will be smuggled out of the Canadian tundra and will also be speaking at the Rally. Gather with likeminded Christians who love freedom, confess Jesus Christ is Lord over all, and be equipped to stand firm in these insane days. Go to FLFNetwork.com/Rally and register today. Remember if you're a Fight Laugh Feast Club Member, you get a $100 off your registration.  Remember: If you have a news story you think we might need to cover, please send articles and links to news at crosspolitic dot com. And DEFT WIRE dot com. Calls Continue for Gov. Cuomo To Step Down Play 1:15-1:22 – that was New York Senator Chuck Schumer and Mayor Deblasio piled on with his own doubts:  1:41-1:48 Amid the reports that Gov. Cuomo intentionally suppressed COVID numbers in New York, after sending many infected elderly individuals to nursing homes, Gov. Cuomo has now been under attack with multiple accusations of inappropriate comments and touching among female staff and aids. Then on Friday, audio surfaced from a phone conversation three years ago, in which he threatened leaders of the progressive Working Families Party, who told him they were only very reluctantly endorsing him for governor, as only being better than the Republican alternative. To which Cuomo apparently replied: Play: 2:28-2:35 Canadian Father Arrested for Using Male Pronouns for His Son https://nypost.com/2021/03/18/man-arrested-for-discussing-childs-gender-in-court-order-violation/?utm_campaign=SocialFlow&utm_medium=SocialFlow&utm_source=NYPTwitter From our News Inbox, several of you A Canadian man was arrested this week after violating a court order that banned him from speaking publicly about his son's gender transition. The man — whose identity is reportedly under a publication ban by a British Columbia Court of Appeals to protect his child — was found in contempt of court and arrested Tuesday for calling the teen his daughter and publicly referring to him with the pronouns “she” and “her,” according to The Post Millennial.  The teenager was born as a female and reportedly identifies as transgender and prefers the use of male pronouns. The father reportedly began litigation against the teen's mother after learning of the transition, and the matter was settled by the province's highest court earlier this year, according to Global News. The parents are separated. The high court ordered the dad to not stand in the way of the 15-year-old's hormone therapy and to try and better understand gender dysphoria, the outlet reported. He was also told to stop speaking to the media about the case and warned that his public attempts to undermine his child's wishes was a form of family violence, according to the article. His daughter has identified as male since the age of 11, and changed her name at age 12 before pursuing hormone therapy with the support of his mother, a psychologist and an endocrinologist, according to Canadian law firm Torkin Manes. “[The father's] refusal to respect [the boy's] decisions regarding his gender identity is troublesome,” Chief Justice Robert Bauman and Justice Barbara Fisher wrote in the January decision, according to Global News. The father's rejection of his son's identity has caused the boy “significant pain” that has “resulted in a rupture of what both parties refer to as an otherwise loving parent-child relationship,” justices reportedly wrote. This rupture is not in [the boy's] best interests,” the decision said, according to the outlet. “He clearly wants and needs acceptance and support from his father.” The father confirmed his legal woes on an online fundraising campaign soliciting donations. “The far left issued an arrest warrant on Thursday, March 04! I will be turning myself in on March 16!,” the man posted in a Go Get Funding page where he has raised more than $22,000 Canadian amid his legal fight. “I am fighting the far left based on a civil disobedience defense! I am now back in court for a five day criminal trial that will last at least five days . . . From April 12-16. That trial that could land me in jail for up to five years for speaking truth about state sponsored child abuse. FYI . . . I am blocked from sharing any videos at this time that oppose the sterilization of children!,” the caption continued. The dad, and his arrest, have been lauded by some ideologues who say gender is not a biological or social construct. “They've created a delusion, and they're forcing parents to live in this delusion,” the father previously said, according to The Post Millennial.  Psalm Sing in San Diego Stone Mountain Media and The Response Church will be hosting another Psalm Sing on 03/27/21 – this Saturday -- at 3pm at the Balboa Park fountain near the amphitheater in San Diego. Psalm of the Day: Psalm 148 https://www.christkirk.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/18-Psalm-148-From-Heavn-O-Praise.mp3 Play Audio Praise the Lord, sun, moon, and stars. Praise the Lord, fire and hail and snow and wind. Praise the Lord, you kings and rulers and judges. Let everything and everyone praise the Lord. And do not think that this is just some pious, pie-in-the-sky wish. We know that it is a prayer that God is in the process of answering. What is the problem with this world? Fundamentally that it refuses to praise it's Maker. So when we call on the whole world to praise the Lord, we calling on the whole world to get right with its Maker. And since we know that Jesus rose from the dead to accomplish that – we know that it is only a matter of time.  This is Toby Sumpter with Crosspolitic News. You can find this and all of our shows at CrossPolitic.com or on our app, which you can download at your favorite app store, just search “Fight Laugh Feast”. Support Rowdy Christian media, and share this show or become a Fight Laugh Feast Club Member. Remember to sign up for the Fight Laugh Feast Rally. Go to FLFNetwork.com/Rally Have a great day.

Guest 1: [00.00-05.35] Pearlman Lindholm was established by Edwin Pearlman and Louis Lindholm in 1954. For 65 years, their firm has consistently maintained its status as one of Victoria's leading law practices and has steadily grown to house twenty-five lawyers. As a full-service law firm, they use our expertise to represent clients in all personal and business matters, handling cases ranging from small to large and complex.Their litigation lawyers routinely appear in the Provincial Court of British Columbia, the Supreme Court of British Columbia, and the British Columbia Court of Appeal. Clients come to us from Vancouver Island, throughout British Columbia, across Canada, from the United States and abroad. Many of their clients are relatives of families that they have represented for generations. they pride themselves on developing successful, long-term relationships with their clients.Learn more about Pearlman Lindholm by visiting: www.pearlmanlindholm.com.Guest 2: [05.35-End of Episode] RSM's purpose is to deliver the power of being understood to their clients, colleagues and communities through world-class audit, tax and consulting services focused on middle market businesses. The clients they serve are the engine of global commerce and economic growth, and they are focused on developing leading professionals and services to meet their evolving needs in today's ever-changing business environment.RSM Canada LLP provides public accounting services and is the Canadian member firm of RSM International, a global network of independent audit, tax and consulting firms with more than 51,000 people in 123 countries. RSM Alberta LLP is a limited liability partnership and independent legal entity that provides public accounting services.  RSM Canada Consulting LP provides consulting services and is an affiliate of RSM US LLP, a member firm of RSM International.Learn more about RSM Canada by visiting: www.rsmcanada.com.Episode Sponsor: Coastal Community Credit Union: Who's helping you take care of your financial health? Coastal Community Credit Union is here to help you reach your goals, and do great things. Visit www.cccu.ca.Mark's Final 2:Best advice: "You should always have a great haircut."App: Garmin Connect.For more local news impacting business, visit: www.businessexaminer.ca Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Andrea Bolieiro (Constitutional Law Branch, MAG Ontario) sits down with Daniel Baum of Langlois in Montréal and Ravi Amarnath of the Constitutional Law Branch, MAG Ontario, who have each worked in both public practice and private practice. Daniel started his career at the Department of Justice before moving to private practice, while Ravi started his career at Blakes in Toronto before moving to MAG. Learn about why they made the move, how their lifestyles and careers changed with the transition, what they enjoy most about their current roles, and their advice on making the transition from public to private practice or vice versa. Views are the participants' own. Daniel Baum is a partner in the litigation group at the Montréal office of Langlois Lawyers, LLP. A versatile litigator, Daniel acts in a wide array of commercial and public law disputes. He notably handles matters involving insolvency, commercial fraud, administrative law and regulatory compliance. Daniel has experience before all levels of Quebec and federal courts, including the Supreme Court of Canada. He is also a sessional lecturer in written and oral advocacy at Université de Montréal's Faculty of Law. Before joining Langlois, Daniel served as litigation counsel for the federal Crown. Ravi Amarnath is counsel for the Ministry of the Attorney General (Constitutional Law Branch). As counsel, Ravi has appeared before all levels of court, including the Supreme Court of Canada. Before joining MAG, Ravi served as litigation counsel at Blakes LLP. Prior to commencing his practice, Ravi completed the BCL program at the University of Oxford and served as a law clerk at the British Columbia Court of Appeal.  Land AcknowledgementThe Advocates' Society acknowledges that our offices, located in Toronto, are on the customary and traditional lands of the Mississaugas of the Credit, the Haudenosaunee, the Anishinabek, the Huron-Wendat and now home to many First Nations, Inuit, and Metis peoples.  We acknowledge current treaty holders, the Mississaugas of the Credit and honour their long history of welcoming many nations to this territory.While The Advocates' Society is based in Toronto, we are a national organization with Directors and members located across Canada in the treaty and traditional territories of many Indigenous Peoples. We encourage our members to reflect upon their relationships with the Indigenous Peoples in these territories, and the history of the land on which they live and work.We acknowledge the devastating impacts of colonization, including the history of residential schools, for many Indigenous peoples, families, and communities and commit to fostering diversity, equity, and inclusiveness in an informed legal profession in Canada and within The Advocates' Society.

(PUBLICATION BAN IN CASE) On December 22, 2016, the appellant, Mr. Albashir, was charged with several offences related to his operation of a commercial trade, including living on the avails of prostitution contrary to s. 212(1)(j) of the Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, between March 15 and December 5, 2014. Despite finding factual guilt on all counts, the trial judge quashed the s. 212(1)(j) counts on the indictment as unconstitutional, relying on Canada (Attorney General) v. Bedford, 2013 SCC 72, [2013] 3 S.C.R. 1101. On December 20, 2013, in Bedford, the Court held that s. 212(1)(j) was overbroad and could not be saved under s. 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, but suspended the declaration of invalidity for a period of one year. The British Columbia Court of Appeal allowed the Crown's appeal and ordered that convictions be entered for the s. 212(1)(j) counts, finding that the trial judge fell into error when he quashed them. Since Parliament replaced s. 212(1)(j) with a new offence that largely mirrors its predecessor in substance but carves out a number of exceptions intended to address concerns over security of the person raised in Bedford within the period of the suspension, conduct captured by the former iteration of the offence during the suspended declaration of invalidity is prosecutable. During the suspension period, s. 212(1)(j) was constitutionally valid. The retroactive effect of a suspended declaration of invalidity is pre-empted by the passing of remedial legislation: the declaration of invalidity never came into effect to render the provision a nullity ab initio. Keywords Constitutional law - Criminal law, Legislation - Constitutional law - Criminal law - Legislation - Declaration of invalidity - Living on avails of prostitution - Temporary suspension of declaration of invalidity - Parliament repealing and replacing legislation before expiration of suspended period - What is the effect of a suspended declaration of invalidity if Parliament repeals and replaces the legislation found to be constitutionally invalid prior to the expiry of the suspended declaration?. Notes (British Columbia) (Criminal) (As of Right) Disclaimers This podcast is created as a public service to promote public access and awareness of the workings of Canada's highest court. It is not affiliated with or endorsed by the Court. The original version of this hearing may be found on the Supreme Court of Canada's website. The above case summary was prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch).

On December 22, 2016, the appellant, Mr. Mohsenipour, was charged with several offences related to his operation of a commercial sex trade, including living on the avails of prostitution between March 15 and December 5, 2014. Despite finding factual guilt on all counts, the trial judge quashed the living off the avails counts as unconstitutional, relying on Canada v. Bedford, 2013 SCC 72. On December 20, 2013, in Bedford, the Court held that the offence of living off the avails of prostitution was overbroad and could not be saved under s. 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Court suspended the declaration of invalidity for a period of one year.The British Columbia Court of Appeal allowed the Crown's appeal and ordered that convictions be entered. Since Parliament replaced the offence with a new offence that largely mirrors its predecessor in substance but carves out a number of exceptions intended to address concerns over security of the person raised in Bedford within the period of the suspension, conduct captured by the former iteration of the offence during the suspended declaration of invalidity is prosecutable. During the suspension period, the offence was constitutionally valid. The retroactive effect of a suspended declaration of invalidity is pre-empted by the passing of remedial legislation: the declaration of invalidity never came into effect to render the provision a nullity ab initio.

This week on Hull on Estates, Jonathon Kappy and Sydney Osmar discuss a recent decision arising out of the British Columbia Court of Appeal which provides a definitive answer on when reproductive material may be used posthumously for the purposes of creating an embryo.

This week on Hull on Estates, Natalia Angelini and Kira Domratchev discuss secret trusts and the recent decision of the British Columbia Court of Appeal in Bergler v Odenthal, 2020 BCCA 175.  

The mandatory ICBC no-fault insurance system that has been proposed for British Columbia is intended to save money by no longer spending time determining who was at fault in an accident.Someone who caused an accident would receive the same benefits as the person they crashed into. Disputes would, however, still arise with respect to how seriously some was injured, or how much compensation they should be provided. It just wouldn’t matter if the person caused the accident or not. Currently, if someone has a dispute with ICBC, they would be entitled to go to court to have a judge decide what they are entitled to. The no-fault scheme would also prevent people from going to court in most circumstances, and disputes would be resolved by an entity called the Civil Resolution Tribunal. The Civil Resolution Tribunal was established to deal with minor strata disputes and very small civil claims of less than $5,000. It operates online in a fashion similar to a PayPal or eBay dispute resolution system. For very minor disputes, like those for which the Civil Resolution Tribunal was intended, this makes sense because deputes can be resolved quickly and inexpensively. Not every strata dispute over a BBQ on a patio needs to go to court. The Civil Resolution Tribunal is not, however, an appropriate mechanism to resolve more serious disputes that involve the provincial government, or ICBC, which is entirely owned by the provincial government. Unlike judges, who are appointed for life, and are independent of government, the adjudicators who work for the Civil Resolution tribunal are appointed by the government on renewable, short term, contracts of between 2 and 4 years. Someone who is dependent on the government for continued employment should not be deciding disputes that involve the government.If you had a dispute with your neighbour, you would not want someone employed by your neighbour to decide the issue. As of April 1, 2019, the provincial government gave the Civil Resolution Tribunal authority to decide disputes with ICBC involving up to $50,000. A review of Civil Resolution Tribunal decisions from July 1, 2020, until October 7, 2020, shows that of 30 disputes involving ICBC, 27 were decided in favour of ICBC, and 3 were decided against ICBC.Whether or not ICBC no-fault insurance is a good idea, disputes with a government-owned insurance company should not be decided by people who depend on the government for continued employment.Also discussed on the show is a decision of the British Columbia Court of Appeal overturning a first-degree murder conviction. The conviction was based on entirely circumstantial evidence after the accused’s wife drowned in a lake.The central issue on the appeal was the use a jury could make of statements the accused provided to the police concerning how his wife drowned. Ordinarily, if a statement by an accused person is disbelieved, it’s no evidence of any kind. Only in limited circumstances can a disbelieved statement be treated as evidence of guilt. Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed.

This week on Legally Speaking with Michael Mulligan:A claim for an alleged breach of contract to rent a property so as to permit it to be used as an Airbnb is denied on the basis that the short-term rentals are not lawfully permitted.Contracts involving illegal activity are not enforceable in court. You can't sue if someone breaches an agreement to pay for illegal drugs, for example. This same issue can arise where there are contracts intended to evade taxation by paying cash.Also discussed in the case is the concept of duress.In order to constitute a defence to the enforceability of a contract, duress requires more than one party taking advantage of a superior bargaining position. For duress to be established there must be coercion of the will of the contracting party and the pressure must be exercised in an unfair, excessive or coercive manner. Next on the show, a British Columbia Court of Appeal decision dealing with the certification of a class action against the Peoples Trust Company is discussed. The class action arose as a result of the company maintaining an unencrypted copy of a database on its webserver. The database contained customer information including names, addresses, email addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth, social insurance numbers, occupations, and more. Patches were not installed to update the software on the server, leaving it vulnerable to known exploits, which were taken advantage of in a cyber-attack that originated in the People’s Republic of China. As with many class actions, defendants often spend a great deal of legal effort resisting the certification of a claim, during which a judge would determine is a case should proceed as a class action. One of the helpful changes that have been made to the law concerning class actions that are commenced in British Columbia is that judges can now certify a class action on an “opt-out” basis for people who do not live in British Columbia. Prior to this change, people outside the province would need to actively “opt-in” if they wished to participate.Finally, a case concerning pay for judges should be determined is discussed. Because judges are often called upon resolve disputes that involve the government, it would not be appropriate to have judges negotiating with the government over their pay. In order to avoid this, there is an independent commission that periodically recommends changes to judges’ salaries and working conditions. Unfortunately, in British Columbia, there is a long history of the government overruling decisions of the independent commission. This has resulted in litigation before Supreme Court Judges who are not impacted by the decisions. In order to reject a decision of the independent commission, there needs to be a rational reason for doing so. This was found to be lacking when the Legislative Assembly rejected the 2016 recommendations by the Judicial Compensation Commission. Given this long and unsatisfactory way in which this issue has been dealt with, it would be better if the independent commission was free to set judge’s salaries without affording a mechanism for the government to interfere with the outcome of this process, short of amending the legislative scheme. Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed.

This week on Legally Speaking with Michael Mulligan:The British Columbia Court of Appeal finds that the Director of Child, Family and Community Services acted unreasonably, and without authority, in telling a single father that children under 10 years of age could not ride the public bus without supervision.The children that were riding the public bus together, to get to school, were 10, 9, 8 and 7 years old. The father had spent two years teaching his children how to use the public bus and provided them with a cell phone, with a tracking feature so that he could monitor their location.The father was required to sign an agreement not to permit any child under the age of 10 to be unsupervised at any time, including on the bus, and implied that the children could be apprehended if he did not comply.The father was able to raise money with a go fund me page to help pay for the court challenge that eventually reached the Court of Appeal.The Director of Child, Family, and Community Services argued in court that the agreement the father was required to sign was just a suggestion. The Court of Appeal judges disagreed and pointed out that while lawyers were making this argument in court, social workers employed by the Director continued to treat the agreement as an order.Also discussed is another British Columbia Court of Appeal decision dismissing a sentence appeal by an aboriginal man who was sentenced to 12 months in jail for growing marijuana and possessing marijuana for the purpose of trafficking.This sentence was upheld despite the fact that marijuana is now being sold in government-run stores that have been deemed an essential service in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. In 1999 the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in R. v. Gladue dealt with the massive overrepresentation of aboriginal people in Canadian jails.Since 1999, however, the percentage of aboriginal people in jail has increased significantly. Aboriginal people make up approximately 5% of the Canadian population but now account for more than 30% of the federal prison population. This is an increase of 5% from four years ago.The disproportionate percentage of aboriginal people in jail is even starker for women: 42% of women in federal prisons are aboriginal. Finally, the BC Attorney General is running into opposition from the Trial Lawyers Association over suggestions including the suspension of civil jury trials, or binding arbitration, to clear a backlog of ICBC cases caused by COVID-19 disruptions to courts.The Trial Lawyers Association has asked the Attorney General to abandon his unpopular plan for mandatory ICBC no-fault insurance if he wishes assistance with the backlog. Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed.

This week on Legally Speaking with Michael Mulligan:The Supreme Court of Canada has declared an arbitration clause, used by Uber, to be unconscionable, and therefore invalid. The clause, included in a 14-page agreement that prospective Uber drivers were required to click “I accept” on, twice, purported to require any disputes with Uber to be dealt with by arbitration, in the Netherlands, rather than going to court. While not specified in the 14-page agreement, it turned out that in order to start the arbitration process, there was a $14,500 USD fee. A driver making a claim would also need to travel to the Netherlands.If it had been found to be enforceable, the other effect of the arbitration clause would have been to prevent the case from being certified as a class action. Every claim would have to proceed separately and would be subject to the $14,500 fee. As a result of the Supreme Court of Canada decision, the case, which involves a dispute as to whether Uber drivers are employees or independent contractors, can proceed.Also discussed is a class action case from British Columbia involving a claim that a group of companies that transport vehicles on ships conspired to fix higher prices for this service. The alleged impact was to raise the price of cars sold in British Columbia. The British Columbia Court of Appeal held that two of the companies involved could still be sued, even though they didn’t deliver cars to British Columbia. The companies didn’t deny that they were involved in a price-fixing conspiracy. The British Columbia Court of Appeal held that the two companies could still be liable on the basis that their participation in the price-fixing conspiracy artificially raised the price charged by other companies that did deliver cars to British Columbia. Finally, a case involving a principal, and several companies associated with Bear Mountain development is discussed. The case involved the taxation of a law firm’s account. A taxation, in this context, is supposed to be an expeditious way to determine if a lawyer’s bill is correct and reasonable.Unfortunately, the former clients made no effort to narrow the focus of the review and demanded a full refund of all fees paid for a complex case that went on for an extended period of time. This resulted in a protracted, 11-day hearing and, ultimately, an award of costs against the client in the amount of $36,465. Costs, in the civil litigation context, are intended to encourage parties to make reasonable concessions, narrow issues, and resolve disputes. Unfortunately, they don’t always have the desired effect. Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed.

Familia! Bienvenidos una vez mas a Juego de Asesinos Podcast,hoy les traemos la historia de Robert William "Willy" Pickton, uno de los peores asesinos en serie de Port Coquitlam, British Columbia. Esperamos que les guste mucho!Gracias por todo su apoyo, los queremos muchisimo, y esperamos tengan un buen fin de semana!LAVEN SUS MANOS Y MANTÉNGANSE EN CASA! BE SAFE!No se olviden de seguirnos en nuestras redes sociales, donde aparecemos como Juego de Asesinos_Podcast, ya sea Facebook o Instagram.fuentes: https://www.thestar.com/news/2007/06/17/picktons_mother_was_a_key_influence.htmlhttps://www.horrorbound.net/blog/2019/4/15/real-life-horror-robertpicktonhttps://murderpedia.org/male.P/p/pickton-robert.htmhttps://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/robert-pickton-casehttps://listverse.com/2018/10/30/10-dark-facts-about-robert-pickton-the-pig-farmer-killer/CBC News (2006-08-09). "Pickton to be initially tried on six counts of murder". Retrieved 2010-08-04. Geoffrey Gaul, a spokesman for the Crown, said his office will have to consider its next move. "Which should go first? Should we go to trial with those six counts or should we look at the other 20 and should we proceed on those 20 or should we proceed on a number of those 20? Those are discretionary calls that the prosecution will make.""British Columbia Court of Appeal Criminal Appeal Rules, 1986, B.C. Reg. 145/86". Retrieved 2008-01-10.*https://www.horrorbound.net/blog/2019/4/15/real-life-horror-robertpickton*https://globalnews.ca/news/4293347/victims-family-says-notorious-killer-robert-willy-pickton-moved-to-quebec/*https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/key-dates-in-the-pickton-case/article6504398/*https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LT_YKLHT_IM*https://supernaught.com/products/robert-willie-pickton-pre-trial-letter-and-envelope-set-both-signed*https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/victim-e2-80-99s-family-says-notorious-killer-robert-e2-80-98willy-e2-80-99-pickton-moved-to-quebec/ar-AAz3Ttj

Familia! Bienvenidos una vez mas a Juego de Asesinos Podcast,hoy les traemos la historia de Robert William "Willy" Pickton, uno de los peores asesinos en serie de Port Coquitlam, British Columbia. Esperamos que les guste mucho!Gracias por todo su apoyo, los queremos muchisimo, y esperamos tengan un buen fin de semana!LAVEN SUS MANOS Y MANTÉNGANSE EN CASA! BE SAFE!No se olviden de seguirnos en nuestras redes sociales, donde aparecemos como Juego de Asesinos_Podcast, ya sea Facebook o Instagram.fuentes: https://www.thestar.com/news/2007/06/17/picktons_mother_was_a_key_influence.htmlhttps://www.horrorbound.net/blog/2019/4/15/real-life-horror-robertpicktonhttps://murderpedia.org/male.P/p/pickton-robert.htmhttps://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/robert-pickton-casehttps://listverse.com/2018/10/30/10-dark-facts-about-robert-pickton-the-pig-farmer-killer/CBC News (2006-08-09). "Pickton to be initially tried on six counts of murder". Retrieved 2010-08-04. Geoffrey Gaul, a spokesman for the Crown, said his office will have to consider its next move. "Which should go first? Should we go to trial with those six counts or should we look at the other 20 and should we proceed on those 20 or should we proceed on a number of those 20? Those are discretionary calls that the prosecution will make.""British Columbia Court of Appeal Criminal Appeal Rules, 1986, B.C. Reg. 145/86". Retrieved 2008-01-10.*https://www.horrorbound.net/blog/2019/4/15/real-life-horror-robertpickton*https://globalnews.ca/news/4293347/victims-family-says-notorious-killer-robert-willy-pickton-moved-to-quebec/*https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/key-dates-in-the-pickton-case/article6504398/*https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LT_YKLHT_IM*https://supernaught.com/products/robert-willie-pickton-pre-trial-letter-and-envelope-set-both-signed*https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/victim-e2-80-99s-family-says-notorious-killer-robert-e2-80-98willy-e2-80-99-pickton-moved-to-quebec/ar-AAz3Ttj

Familia! Bienvenidos una vez mas a Juego de Asesinos Podcast, hoy les traemos la historia de Robert William "Willy" Pickton, uno de los peores asesinos en serie de Port Coquitlam, British Columbia. Esperamos que les guste mucho! Gracias por todo su apoyo, los queremos muchisimo, y esperamos tengan un buen fin de semana! LAVEN SUS MANOS Y MANTÉNGANSE EN CASA! BE SAFE! No se olviden de seguirnos en nuestras redes sociales, donde aparecemos como Juego de Asesinos_Podcast, ya sea Facebook o Instagram. fuentes: https://www.thestar.com/news/2007/06/17/picktons_mother_was_a_key_influence.html https://www.horrorbound.net/blog/2019/4/15/real-life-horror-robertpickton https://murderpedia.org/male.P/p/pickton-robert.htm https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/robert-pickton-case https://listverse.com/2018/10/30/10-dark-facts-about-robert-pickton-the-pig-farmer-killer/ CBC News (2006-08-09). "Pickton to be initially tried on six counts of murder". Retrieved 2010-08-04. Geoffrey Gaul, a spokesman for the Crown, said his office will have to consider its next move. "Which should go first? Should we go to trial with those six counts or should we look at the other 20 and should we proceed on those 20 or should we proceed on a number of those 20? Those are discretionary calls that the prosecution will make." "British Columbia Court of Appeal Criminal Appeal Rules, 1986, B.C. Reg. 145/86". Retrieved 2008-01-10. *https://www.horrorbound.net/blog/2019/4/15/real-life-horror-robertpickton *https://globalnews.ca/news/4293347/victims-family-says-notorious-killer-robert-willy-pickton-moved-to-quebec/ *https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/key-dates-in-the-pickton-case/article6504398/ *https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LT_YKLHT_IM *https://supernaught.com/products/robert-willie-pickton-pre-trial-letter-and-envelope-set-both-signed *https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/victim-e2-80-99s-family-says-notorious-killer-robert-e2-80-98willy-e2-80-99-pickton-moved-to-quebec/ar-AAz3Ttj

Familia! Bienvenidos una vez mas a Juego de Asesinos Podcast, hoy les traemos la historia de Robert William "Willy" Pickton, uno de los peores asesinos en serie de Port Coquitlam, British Columbia. Esperamos que les guste mucho! Gracias por todo su apoyo, los queremos muchisimo, y esperamos tengan un buen fin de semana! LAVEN SUS MANOS Y MANTÉNGANSE EN CASA! BE SAFE! No se olviden de seguirnos en nuestras redes sociales, donde aparecemos como Juego de Asesinos_Podcast, ya sea Facebook o Instagram. fuentes: https://www.thestar.com/news/2007/06/17/picktons_mother_was_a_key_influence.html https://www.horrorbound.net/blog/2019/4/15/real-life-horror-robertpickton https://murderpedia.org/male.P/p/pickton-robert.htm https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/robert-pickton-case https://listverse.com/2018/10/30/10-dark-facts-about-robert-pickton-the-pig-farmer-killer/ CBC News (2006-08-09). "Pickton to be initially tried on six counts of murder". Retrieved 2010-08-04. Geoffrey Gaul, a spokesman for the Crown, said his office will have to consider its next move. "Which should go first? Should we go to trial with those six counts or should we look at the other 20 and should we proceed on those 20 or should we proceed on a number of those 20? Those are discretionary calls that the prosecution will make." "British Columbia Court of Appeal Criminal Appeal Rules, 1986, B.C. Reg. 145/86". Retrieved 2008-01-10. *https://www.horrorbound.net/blog/2019/4/15/real-life-horror-robertpickton *https://globalnews.ca/news/4293347/victims-family-says-notorious-killer-robert-willy-pickton-moved-to-quebec/ *https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/key-dates-in-the-pickton-case/article6504398/ *https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LT_YKLHT_IM *https://supernaught.com/products/robert-willie-pickton-pre-trial-letter-and-envelope-set-both-signed *https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/victim-e2-80-99s-family-says-notorious-killer-robert-e2-80-98willy-e2-80-99-pickton-moved-to-quebec/ar-AAz3Ttj

The Supreme Court of Canada has permitted a claim by workers at a mine in Eritrea to proceed, after concluding that Canada has adopted “customary international law” into the Canadian legal system.The Eritrean miners brought the proposed class claim action against a British Columbia based mining company, which is a part-owner of the Eritrean mine where they work.The miners are seeking damages for breaches of customary international law prohibitions against forced labour, slavery, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, and crimes against humanity. They allege that the Eritrean government has forced them to work at the mine, in terrible conditions, without pay, indefinitely.The majority of the Supreme Court of Canada described modern international human rights law as “the phoenix that rose from the ashes of World War II and declared global war on human rights abuses.”Also discussed on the show is a decision from the British Columbia Court of Appeal, which will permit a claim by a snowboarder against Grouse Mountain Resorts to proceed.While attempting a run on the resort’s XL jump, the 20-year-old snowboarder suffered a significant spinal injury and is now a quadriplegic. The Court of Appeal overturned the trial judge and found that the waiver on the back of the ticket, and posted at the resort, was not determinative. In order to be effective, the court confirmed that waivers of liability need to be sufficiently brought to the customer's attention before they purchase a ticket. Here the sign with the waiver was only visible after the ticket was purchased, and the waiver on the back of the ticket was both small, and not provided until the ticket was already purchased.There is a larger public policy question to be considered concerning whether waivers of liability like this should ever be permitted. If they were not, it would likely result in increased ticket prices for dangerous recreational activities to cover the cost of insurance. If waivers are permitted, the effect is to shift the cost of caring for people who are injured to the public generally.Finally, a case concerning the largest claim ICBC has ever experienced is discussed: In 2018, on two separate occasions, sulfuric acid was spilled on the highway near Trail BC, by a truck that was transporting it. The acid damaged thousands of cars, including 846 vehicles that were written off due to the extent of the damage.The court decision will permit ICBC, and other insurance companies, to bring a single subrogated claim against the companies that allegedly spilled the acid on the highway.Interestingly, if BC had a no-fault insurance scheme, as has been proposed, it is unlikely anything could be recovered from the companies that spilled the acid. This would not encourage more care to be taken when driving with dangerous goods. Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed.Legally Speaking with Michael Mulligan is live on CFAX 1070 every Thursday at 10:30 am.

Two new British Columbia Court of Appeal decisions are discussed on the show this week. When can you sue a municipality for an injury caused by poorly cleared snow? The Court of Appeal provided some clarity in a recent case against the City of Nelson. The plaintiff suffered a serious leg injury after stepping into a snowbank trying to get from an angled parking spot to the sidewalk.While a municipality is not liable for injuries caused by policy decisions, such as whether to clear the snow or not, they can be liable when a policy decision is poorly implemented, and this causes a hazard. The legal distinction is between “policy” and “operation”.The second case discussed involved a 14-year-old who was diagnosed with gender dysphoria and wished to undertake hormone therapy following a social transition from female to male at age 12. The child’s parents had been separated for several years and, while the child’s mother supported the treatment, the father opposed it.Various court application ensued and an order was made against the father declaring that his references to the child as a girl, whether directly or to third parties, was a form of “family violence” pursuant a definition of this term in the Family Law Act that includes things like “psychological or emotional abuse of a family member.”The father was ordered not to attempt to persuade the child to abandon the treatment, not to refer to the child by his birth name, and not to refer to the child as a girl or with female pronouns to the child, or any third parties.The unfortunate language used in the Family Law Act, which defines “psychological or emotional abuse” as “violence” seems to have made this dispute worse, as the language is inconsistent with any ordinary meaning of the term “violence”.While the conduct of the father, in refusing to accept the child’s chosen gender, and to refuse to address him by the name he had chosen was found to be disrespectful and hurtful, the Court of Appeal found that, despite the incongruent definition in the Family Law Act, this should not have been characterized as family violence.The Court of Appeal also modified the lower court order which prohibited the father from discussing the matter with the child or expressing his opinion to the friends or family members.The hormone therapy continued, without the approval of the father, because section 17 of the Infants Act permits minors to consent to their own medical treatment.Legally Speaking with Victoria Lawyer Michael Mulligan is live on CFAX 1070 every Thursday at 10:30 am.Links to the cases discussed, and a transcript of the show can be found here.

Three Chinese scientists were sentenced to jail for editing the genes of three fetuses in an attempt to provide immunity from HIV. The scientist used CRISPR in an attempt to disable the gene that allows the HIV virus to enter a cell. The fathers of the children, who appear to be healthy, had HIV. Their mothers did not. The three scientists announced what they had done at a 2018 conference in Hong Kong and, shortly thereafter, disappeared. They had been in Chinese custody and were recently sentenced to between two and three years in jail, after they plead guilty to practicing medicine without a licence, at a non-public hearing.The concern with the activity of the scientists is that the genetic changes they made to the fetuses were subject to being passed along to future generations, and the effects are not known. In Canada, the Assisted Human Reproduction Act prohibits the alteration of “the genome of a cell of a human being in vitro embryo such that the alteration is capable of being transmitted to descendants” in. Doing so is punishable by up to five years in jail. Other things prohibited, by this act in Canada, include the creation of human-animal hybrids, the transplantation of human fetuses into animals, or animals or animal fetuses into humans. It is also unlawful to “maintain an embryo outside the body of a female person after the fourteenth day of its development following fertilization or creation, excluding any time during which its development has been suspended”.Also discussed on the show are two proposed class actions. One proposed class action, against Shaw, alleges that Shaw participated in an “unlawful pricing scheme” involving routine discrimination against existing and potential customers by offering a discounted rate exclusively to individuals who communicated with Shaw in either Mandarin and/or Cantonese. Shaw denies the allegation and was successful in an application for a summary trial, prior to deciding on an application for the certification of the claim as a class action.The other class action involved a successful appeal to the British Columbia Court of appeal, in order to certify a class action on behalf of employees of the University of Victoria, who were subjected to a wage freeze from 2013 – 2016 as a result of an emailed direction from the then Minister of Finance. Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed.Legally Speaking with Michael Mulligan is live on CFAX 1070 Thursdays at 10:30 am.

Legally Speaking with Victoria Lawyer Michael Mulligan on CFAX 1070Issues discussed include jury deliberations, sequestration, the fact that the substance of jury deliberations are secret in Canada, what information is included in a charge to the jury, information not provided to the jury, including the possible sentence if there is a conviction, and how judges deal with jury questions or cases where a jury is unable to arrive at a unanimous verdict.Also discussed is a recent test case from the British Columbia Court of Appeal: Tanious v. The Empire Life Insurance Company. This case dealt with a successful claim for disability insurance benefits, and the circumstances in which special costs can be awarded. Special costs, as distinct from party and party costs, represent the actual legal costs incurred by a party to a claim. The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge, who awarded special costs on the basis that it was in the interest of justice for the institutional defendant to indemnify the impoverished and disabled claimant fully for the reasonable costs of pursuing her claim. Note: On October 3 and 10, Legally Speaking will be live on CFAX 1070 at 11:00am, rather than the regularly scheduled time of 10:30am.

We're looking at the appeal of the British Columbia Court of Appeal's decision in Nevsun Resources v. Araya, that Eritrean nationals can bring a case in a Canadian court against a Canadian mining company they claim engaged in human rights abuses. When the world of business and technology is pulling ever closer together - and shareholders and customers expect industry to constantly strive for bigger, cheaper, faster - what role do the concepts of national boundaries and state sovereignty play?  And while states may benefit from state immunity, what about corporations wanting to do business in and with those states?  Just how far can the shields states hide behind also protect business interests, particularly when human rights are on the line?  These are just some of the questions we'll be exploring on this episode of The General Appeal Podcast. Our guest this episode is Cory Wanless, Waddell Phillips, @CoryWanless - Link to the British Columbia Court of Appeal decision: Araya v. Nevsun Resources, 2017 BCCA 401: https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcca/#search/type=decision&ccId=bcca&id=nevsun&origType=decision&origCcId=bcca - Link to factums in the Nevsun Appeal to the SCC: https://www.scc-csc.ca/case-dossier/info/af-ma-eng.aspx?cas=37919

The British Columbia Court of Appeal says the province cannot restrict oil shipments through its borders, in a decision that marks a win for the future of the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion.  The province filed a constitutional reference question to the court that asked whether it had the authority to create a permitting regime for companies that wished to increase their flow of diluted bitumen. A five-judge Appeal Court panel agreed unanimously that B.C.'s proposed legislation was not constitutional because it interferes with the federal government's exclusive jurisdiction over interprovincial pipelines. But groups like Stand.Earth who are opposed to the pipeline say that today's announcement does not mean their opposition goes away,   Guest: Sven Biggs Climate and Energy Campaigner with stand.earth

The British Columbia Court of Appeal says the province cannot restrict oil shipments through its borders, in a decision that marks a win for the future of the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion.  The province filed a constitutional reference question to the court that asked whether it had the authority to create a permitting regime for companies that wished to increase their flow of diluted bitumen. A five-judge Appeal Court panel agreed unanimously that B.C.'s proposed legislation was not constitutional because it interferes with the federal government's exclusive jurisdiction over interprovincial pipelines.   Joining us now to break down the ruling is Global BC Legislature Bureau Chief Keith Baldrey   Guest: Keith Baldrey Global BC Legislature Bureau Chief

In today’s podcast, Jonathon Kappy and Kira Domratchev discuss the British Columbia Court of Appeal decision of Killam v Killam (2018) BCCA 64, and the “four corners” approach versus the “armchair” approach in interpreting the testator’s intention.

Acumen Law's Kyla Lee kicks off the first episode of People of BC's Justice System — a new podcast focusing on the personalities and roles in the B.C.'s legal world. In our debut episode, Kyla talks to lawyer Chris Carta from Trial Lawyers Advocacy Group about what child support matters get litigated in B.C., and poses a legal conundrum around how far you can push responsibility in personal injury cases. Chris is a civil litigator and family dispute resolution professional at Trial Lawyers Advocacy Group in Surrey. He completed his B.A. in International Relations and his J.D. at the University of British Columbia. He has represented clients at the Provincial Court of British Columbia, the Supreme Court of British Columbia, and the British Columbia Court of Appeal. You can follow Kyla Lee on twitter at https://twitter.com/IRPlawyer, or visit her website at http://kylalee.ca For more Chris Carta, follow on Twitter at https://twitter.com/ccarta

The Empire Club of Canada Presents: Right Honourable Beverley McLachlin, P.C., Chief Justice of Canada Chief Justice McLachlin spent her formative years in Pincher Creek, Alberta and was educated at the University of Alberta, where she received a B.A. (Honours) in Philosophy in 1965. She pursued her studies at the University of Alberta and, in 1968, received both an M.A. in Philosophy and an LL.B. She was called to the Alberta Bar in 1969 and to the British Columbia Bar in 1971 and practised law in Alberta and British Columbia. Commencing in 1974, she taught for seven years in the Faculty of Law at the University of British Columbia as a tenured Associate Professor. Her judicial career began in April 1981 when she was appointed to the Vancouver County Court. In September 1981, she was appointed to the Supreme Court of British Columbia. She was elevated to the British Columbia Court of Appeal in December of 1985 and was appointed Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of British Columbia in September 1988. Seven months later, in April 1989, she was sworn in as a Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada. On January 7, 2000, she was appointed Chief Justice of Canada. She is the first woman in Canada to hold this position. In addition to her judicial duties at the Supreme Court, the Chief Justice chairs the Canadian Judicial Council, the Advisory Council of the Order of Canada and the Board of Governors of the National Judicial Institute. The Chief Justice is the author of numerous articles and publications. Speaker: The Right Honourable Beverley McLachlin, P.C., Chief Justice of Canada *The content presented is free of charge but please note that the Empire Club of Canada retains copyright. Neither the speeches themselves nor any part of their content may be used for any purpose other than personal interest or research without the explicit permission of the Empire Club of Canada.* *Views and Opinions Expressed Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed by the speakers or panelists are those of the speakers or panelists and do not necessarily reflect or represent the official views and opinions, policy or position held by The Empire Club of Canada.*

This week on Hull on Estates, Natalia Angelini and Nick Esterbauer discuss the recent decision of the British Columbia Court of Appeal in , 2017 BCCA 59, and the limitations of the duty owed by a drafting solicitor to disappointed beneficiaries.

The Empire Club of Canada Presents: The Right Honourable Beverley McLachlin, P.C., Chief Justice of Canada With The First Event of our Sesquicentennial Series: Celebrating Canada's 150th Anniversary Canada's Legal System at 150: Fostering Canadian Democracy Through an Independent Judiciary. An independent judiciary is an essential feature of a free, democratic society. Canada's sesquicentennial presents an opportunity to take stock of this cornerstone of Canadian democracy. Judicial independence has characterized the Canadian constitutional order even as the country evolved from a system of Parliamentary sovereignty under the British North America Act, 1867, to one of constitutional supremacy under the Constitution Act, 1982 and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Through a survey of this evolution, the address will draw attention to current concerns relating to judicial independence in Canada, and to the need to better understand this most fundamental of constitutional principles. Chief Justice McLachlin spent her formative years in Pincher Creek, Alberta and was educated at the University of Alberta, where she received a B.A., Honours, in Philosophy in 1965. She pursued her studies at the University of Alberta and, in 1968, received both an M.A. in Philosophy and an LL.B. She was called to the Alberta Bar in 1969 and to the British Columbia Bar in 1971 and practised law in Alberta and British Columbia. Commencing in 1974, she taught for seven years in the Faculty of Law at the University of British Columbia as a tenured Associate Professor. Her judicial career began in April 1981 when she was appointed to the Vancouver County Court. In September 1981, she was appointed to the Supreme Court of British Columbia. She was elevated to the British Columbia Court of Appeal in December of 1985 and was appointed Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of British Columbia in September 1988. Seven months later, in April 1989, she was sworn in as a Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada. On January 7, 2000, she was appointed Chief Justice of Canada. She is the first woman in Canada to hold this position. In addition to her judicial duties at the Supreme Court, the Chief Justice chairs the Canadian Judicial Council, the Advisory Council of the Order of Canada and the Board of Go Judicial Institute. The Chief Justice is the author of numerous articles and publications. Speaker: The Right Honourable Beverley McLachlin, P.C., Chief Justice of Canada *The content presented is free of charge but please note that the Empire Club of Canada retains copyright. Neither the speeches themselves nor any part of their content may be used for any purpose other than personal interest or research without the explicit permission of the Empire Club of Canada.* *Views and Opinions Expressed Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed by the speakers or panelists are those of the speakers or panelists and do not necessarily reflect or represent the official views and opinions, policy or position held by The Empire Club of Canada.*

This week on Hull on Estates, Jonathon Kappy and Noah Weisberg discuss the recent British Columbia Court of Appeal decision in Bentley v. Maplewood Seniors Care Society, which amongst other things, stresses the importance that persons who wish to make provision for their care and decision-making in their declining years to obtain legal advice.

This week on Hull on Estates Paul Trudelle and Rick Bickhram discuss the case of out of the British Columbia Court of Appeal.  The issues examined are timing, fulfillment of conditions under court orders and how this case is relevant to others in similar situations.  

During Hull on Estates Podcast #46, Ian and Suzana discuss the concept of causation and how it relates to estate matters. Referring to the texts of   and , negligence claims, the standard and duty of care and the question of onus are considered. The cases of  in the British Columbia Court of Appeal, Sykes v. Midland Bank [1971] 1 Q.B. 113 and Major v. Buchanan (1975), 9 O.R. (2nd) 491 at 514, 61 D.L.R. (3rd) 46 (H.C.)are also examined.