Où sont passées nos nouvelles? Un examination sur la proposition de loi C-18

Cindy Lin, 2L, rédactrice du volume 82 et Erin Lee, 2L, rédactrice du volume 82

Depuis la promulgation de loi C-18, Loi concernant les plateformes de communication en ligne rendant disponible du contenu de nouvelles aux personnes se trouvant au Canada, les utilisateurs des médias sociaux au Canada ont constaté une perturbation de contenu de nouvelles qu'ils peuvent consulter sur certaines plateformes. Les rédactrices du volume 82 Cindy Lin et Erin Lee examinent ce que cela signifie pour l'industrie des nouvelles au Canada et ses effets sur les utilisateurs des médias sociaux au Canada.

Read More
Where Did Our News Go? A Look at Bill C-18

Cindy Lin, 2L, Volume 82 Executive Editor of Forum Conveniens and Erin Lee, 2L, Volume 82 Forum Editor

Since Parliament’s enactment of Bill C-18, An Act respecting online communications platforms that make news content available to persons in Canada, social media users have noticed a disruption to the news content they can view on certain platforms. Volume 82 Editors Cindy Lin and Erin Lee explore what this means for the Canadian news industry and its effects on social media users in Canada.

Read More
R v Hilbach: One Step Forward, One Step Back

Emily Chu, 2L, Volume 82 Articles Editor

In early 2023, the Supreme Court of Canada simultaneously released two decisions regarding the constitutionality of mandatory minimums: R v Hills and R v Hilbach. Emily Chu argues that the Hilbach majority’s reluctance to strike down the mandatory minimum sentence in that case undermines its message put forward in Hills, which signaled support for principles of individualized sentencing reconciliation.

Read More
R v Beaver: A “fresh start” for the Charter’s section 24(2) test?

Laura Cameron, 3L, Volume 81 Articles Editor

If an individual has been unlawfully detained and questioned, can police make a “fresh start” midway through the interrogation to insulate any evidence subsequently obtained from the earlier violations of Charter rights? In R v Beaver, a five-member majority of the SCC answered this question in the affirmative. 3L Laura Cameron explores why this adjustment represents a concerning development.

Read More
Cheers! Where Nobody Knows Your Name: An Analysis of Commercial Host Liability in Canadian Tort Law

Nathan McLean, 2L, Volume 81 Articles Editor

Host liability for alcohol-infused injury is a major, contested issue in Canadian tort law. In this blog post, Articles Editor Nathan McClean questions whether the Supreme Court has erred in assigning liability to commercial establishments for injuries caused by or to their intoxicated patrons.

Read More
Child Abduction, the Best Interests of the Child, and the Supreme Court’s Decision in F v N

Rebecca Rabinovitch, 2L, Articles Editor

2023 was a banner year for family law at the Supreme Court of Canada. In this new blog post, Articles Editor Rebecca Rabinovitch critically analyzes the judgment in F v N, and criticizes both the majority and the dissent for failing to fully consider the best interests of the child, from the full perspective of the child.

Read More
Ahluwhalia and an Unnecessary New Tort? The Divorce Act, Family Violence, and Spousal Support

Anastasia Jones, 3L, Volume 81 Senior Editor

Ontario courts recently recognized the new tort of family violence. This tort is intended to remedy the harms of a collapsed, abusive marriage. But is this judge-made tort really necessary? Senior Editor Anastasia Jones argues that amendments to the Divorce Act would better achieve the goals of remedying violence in a family contexts.

Read More
Aylmer Meat Packers Inc v Ontario: (Limited) Progress in the Framework for Assessing the Negligence of Governmental Actors

Faisal K. Bhabha, 3L, Volume 81 Senior Editor

According to the Ontario Court of Appeal in Aylmer Meat Packers Inc v Ontario, the Government owes a duty of care when it puts a party’s business interests at risk in the course of carrying out a regulatory function. This holding, according to Senior Editor Faisal K. Bhabha, is bound to sit uncomfortably with the earlier negligence precedent established in Cooper v Hobart.

Read More
R v Bissonnette: Uncompromising on Charter Values and Public Safety

Lauren Teixeira, 3L, Senior Editor

In R v Bissonnette, the Supreme Court of Canada held that sentencing offenders to serve consecutive parole ineligibility periods is unconstitutional. This outcome of case, borne out of the horrific Montreal Mosque shooting, dismayed both politicians and the public. Lauren Teixeira argues that these fears are misplaced.

Read More