Forum Conveniens is the official online companion of the University of Toronto Faculty of Law Review. The online companion is a forum for members of the UofT Law community to share their thoughts on topical developments in the law. Our publications including case commentaries, opinion pieces, and reports on activities within UofT Law.
All are welcome to write for Forum Conveniens! If you have a pitch for a piece, or a paper you would like to convert into a forum post, please visit our submission form here.
Bryan Hsu, 3L, Volume 80 Senior Editor
Was the Federal Court of Appeal correct in holding that it had equitable jurisdiction to grant an order to block user access to websites which have the primary purpose of providing copyright infringing vontent? Senior Editor Bryan Hsu discusses the Federal Court of Appeal's holding in Teksavvy Solutions Inc v Bell Media Inc and how the decision may be impacted by upcoming legislative reform.
Read MoreMadison Kerr, 3L, Senior Editor
Recently, the Securities Act (Ontario) has been amended to include the fostering of capital market competition into the established purposes of the Act, thereby influencing the interpretation and enforcement of securities law in Ontario. Senior Editor Madison Kerr discusses what fostering competition may look like in practise and identifies the two intended effects of securities law enforcement - intrajurisdictional and interjurisdictional competition.
Read MoreTrent Erickson, 3L, Senior Editor
How should Courts consider the plea resolution disucssion on sentencing from the Crown and defence council in a criminal trial? Senior Editor Trent Erickson examines the upcoming appeal of Kerry Alexander Nahanee v Her Majesty the Queen to propose an extended Anthony-Cook test in cases where there is a range of acceptable sentences produced through plea agreements.
Read MoreMyim Bakan Kline, 3L, Senior Editor
In the last few years, legislative and administrative responses to the COVID-19 pandemic, have led to a number of allegations that these measures infringed Charter rights. Senior Editor Myim Bakan Kline examines two such cases, and considers which standard of review courts should apply in future pandemic-related Charter cases.
Read MoreHannah Lank, 3L, Volume 80 Senior Forum Editor
In the future, could a tattoo constitute a valid will? What about a text message? Ontario courts have been reluctant to accept even electronic documents as valid testamentary instruments. Senior Editor Hannah Lank explores the rationales behind Ontario’s exclusion of electronic wills, and examines the use of electronic wills in other jurisdictions.
Read MoreSterling Mancuso, 2L, Volume 80 Senior Forum Editor
Can Parliament criminalize “blind bidding” in the Canadian housing market, under the Constitutional division of powers? Senior Forum Editor Sterling Mancuso discusses.
Read MoreFaisal Bhabha, 2L, Volume 80 Articles Editor
In cases of contract formation, how important is the intention to create legal relations? Senior Editor Faisal Bhabha critiques the Supreme Court of Canada’s intention-centric approach in Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church of Canada St. Mary Cathedral v Aga, and considers the continued merits of the doctrine of consideration.
Read MoreAinslie Pierrynowski, 3L, Volume 80 Senior Editor
What constitutes an undue delay in an administrative proceeding? In Abrametz v Law Society of Saskatchewan, the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal seemed to lower the threshold for staying an administrative proceeding due to delay. Senior Editor Ainslie Pierrynowski critiques the decision and argues that in the upcoming appeal, the SCC should adopt a contextual approach.
Read MoreJack Olson, 2L, Volume 80 Senior Forum Editor
In the second blog of a two-part series, Senior Editor Mashoka Maimona analyses R v Chouhan and R v Kokopenace to illustrate the growing divide within the Supreme Court regarding whether diversity-enhancing mechanisms in the jury selection process are desirable and practical. Maimona also argues in favour of the need for increased diversity-enhancing measures in the aftermath of Bill C-75.
Read MoreRachel Allen, 3L, Volume 80 Senior Editor
Senior Editor Rachel Allen provides an analysis of Ontario (Attorney General) v G, and the history of systemic stigmatization and long-term consequences of being declared not criminally responsible by reason of mental disorder (“NCRMD”).
Read MoreMashoka Maimona, 3L, Volume 79 Senior Editor
In this first blog in a two-part series, Senior Editor Mashoka Maimona discusses R v Chouhan and the federal government’s elimination of peremptory challenges under Bill C-75 as it relates to bias in juries.
Michael Law-Smith, 2L, Volume 79 Articles Editor
How has Kantian theory influenced Canadian Courts? Articles Editor Michael Law-Smith considers the influence of “Toronto School” private law theory on the decision in 1688782 Ontario Inc. v Maple Leaf Foods Inc.
Read MoreSaambavi Mano, 3L, Volume 79 Senior Editor
What does Fraser v Canada's clarification of adverse effects sex discrimination under s. 15 mean for Canadian law? Senior Editor Saambavi Mano considers the positives, negatives, and missed opportunities of the decision.
Read MorePaul Hildebrandt, 3L, Volume 79 Senior Editor
In this blog post on R v Alta Energy Luxembourg SARL (Alta Energy), Senior editor Paul Hildebrandt argues against using the General Anti-Avoidance Rule (“GAAR”) to prevent “treaty shopping”.
Read MoreLauren Scott, 3L, Volume 79 Executive Editor
Executive Editor Lauren Scott argues that the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in CSF represented its “powerful commitment” to the minority language educational rights under s. 23 of the Charter.
Read MoreWilliam Rooney, 3L, Volume 79 Senior Editor
The Jordan framework determines whether there is a s. 11(b) violation (trial within a reasonable time). Senior Editor William Rooney argues that the recent decision in R v KGK limits the Jordan framework by excluding the verdict deliberation time from the s. 11(b) inquiry and more broadly, it “insulates” the judiciary from being held accountable for delays in reaching a decision.
Read MoreAinslie Pierrynowski, 2L, Volume 79 Articles Editor
Articles Editor Ainslie Pierrynowski takes on Uashaunnuat, a Supreme Court of Canada case that dealt with an Aboriginal title claim extending across the Quebec-Newfoundland and Labrador borders. Pierrynowski argues that the case has meaningful implications for Aboriginal rights claims across provincial and, potentially, national borders.
Read MoreShimon Sherrington, 3L, Volume 78 Editor-in-Chief
Ahead of the Supreme Court of Canada’s review of Southwind v Canada, Editor-in-Chief Shimon Sherrington argues that the case presents an opportunity to clarify the application of ‘equitable compensation’ in First Nations-Crown relationship, and thereby redefine the nature of the Crown’s fiduciary duty to First Nations.
Read MoreRyan Howes, 3L, Volume 78 Senior Editor
Senior Editor Ryan Howes draws attention to “considerable uncertainty” about the role of the courts regarding the use of the Emergencies Act, a relevant discussion in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Read MoreEmma Ryman, 3L, Volume 78 Senior Editor
Under the Jordon Framework, the "reasonable time" in which a person has a right to be tried under s. 11(b) of the Charter is 18 months. In KJM, the Supreme Court declined to reduce that that presumptive trial delay ceiling for young offenders to 15 months for young offenders, although the Court did unanimously agree that young offenders have an enhanced need for timeliness in their criminal proceedings. Senior Editor Emma Ryman considers the implications.
Read More
