Skip to content

A Commentary on Hryniak v. Mauldin

The latest issue of The Advocates’ Journal has a commentary on the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Hryniak v. Mauldin by Jonathan Lisus. Mr. Lisus asks: “How will litigation history judge the decision – as a requiem for the vanishing trial or as a catalyst for modern trial procedure?” It’s fair to say that

The Court of Appeal Has Misgivings About Summary Judgment

In its landmark decision in Hryniak v. Mauldin, 2014 SCC 7, the Supreme Court of Canada held that summary judgment offered a viable process for adjudication in many civil claims. The Court overturned the decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal, saying the Court had “placed too high a premium” on the “full appreciation” of

Judicial Temperament

In a widely reported decision, Laver v. Swrjeski, 2014 ONCA 294, the Ontario Court of Appeal set aside a decision of Superior Court Judge John McMunagle for apprehension of bias. The case involved an application that money advanced by the applicant to her daughter and her daughter’s common law husband for the purchase of a

Discretion and the Quebec Election Campaign

Noted constitutional and human rights lawyer Julius Grey has been practicing at the Quebec bar for over 40 years. His latest project has landed him squarely in the middle of an important issue in the Quebec election campaign. On the one hand, officials of the Parti Quebecois have expressed concern that “outside forces” will commit

A Linguist’s Perspective on the Supreme Court Act

In my post yesterday on the decision in Reference re Supreme Court Act, ss. 5 and 6, I mentioned that the statutory interpretation issues raised in the decision were as much linguistic as they were legal issues. It therefore seems appropriate to have the perspective of a trained linguist on sections 5 and 6 of