Skip to content

Costly Errors

Following release of the October 17, 2013 Hearing Panel decision in the prosecution of Torys LLP lawyers Elizabeth DeMerchant and Darren Sukonick, I raised the question here of why the Law Society continued with the prosecution for as long as it did. Those views were based on information contained in the reasons of the Hearing

A Prosecutor’s Continuing Duty to Evaluate Evidence

I preface this comment by saying that I know nothing about the evidence in the Law Society of Upper Canada’s prosecution of Torys LLP lawyers Darren Sukonick and Elizabeth DeMerchant, other than what is disclosed in the reasons for judgment of the Hearing Panel dated October 17, 2013. I have not seen the documents relied

Let the Sun Shine Into the Jury Room

Section 649 of the Criminal Code makes it an offence for a juror to disclose “any information relating to the proceedings of the jury when it was absent from the courtroom that was not subsequently disclosed in open court.” This sweeping prohibition has prevented the public from knowing about the reasons for, and the process

Oral Argument in Motions Court

There has been so much of value written on the subject of oral advocacy that it would be impossible to review these efforts in a short paper. For the purpose of discussing oral advocacy in motions court, there are several approaches that warrant emphasis: (1) put yourself in the position of the audience; (2) the

Case Comment: Zacharias v. Zurich Insurance Company

The decision of the Court of Appeal for Ontario in Zacharias v. Zurich Insurance Company, 2013 ONCA 482, is of interest in a number of respects. From the perspective of appellate practice, the case is noteworthy in that the grounds for the Court’s decision were based on an argument that had not been made before