Jensen Shawa Solomon Duguid Hawkes LLP is pleased to provide summaries of recent Court Decisions which consider the Alberta Rules of Court and comment on the application of the new Rules. JSS BARRISTERS RULES provides a convenient overview of how the Courts are interpreting the new Rules.

The fourth edition of the JSS BARRISTERS RULES Newsletter is now available on our website at www.jssbarristers.ca. Our website also features a Cumulative Summary of Court Decisions which consider the Alberta Rules of Court. The Cumulative Summary of the Rules is organized by the Rule considered, and includes an expanded summary of the Decisions including key quotations from the Decisions. The Cumulative Summary will continue to be updated regularly to ensure that it provides an ongoing and current resource for those interested in the consideration of the Rules of Court on a cumulative basis

Future JSS Barristers Rules Newsletter issues will be available online at www.jssbarristers.ca. If you would like to review past publications of JSS BARRISTERS RULES or receive electronic issues of future JSS BARRISTERS RULES via email when they are published, please visit our website at www.jssbarristers.ca.

As noted in previous posts, in its newsletter titled JSS Barristers Rules JSS Barristers provides summaries of cases considering the new Alberta Rules of Court, Alta Reg 124/2010.

Issue 3 of the Newsletter and updated Cumulative Summary are now available here.

The JSS Barristers website, www.jssbarristers.ca, features a Cumulative Summary of Court Decisions which considers the Alberta Rules of Court. The Cumulative Summary of the Rules is organized by the Rule considered, and includes an expanded summary of the Decisions including key quotations from the Decisions. It is updated regularly to ensure that it provides an ongoing and current resource for those interested in the consideration of the Rules of Court on a cumulative basis.

Those who are interested in receiving future editions of JSS Barristers Rules can subscribe here.

As noted in a previous post, JSS Barristers is providing summaries of cases considering the new Alberta Rules of Court, Alta. Reg. 124/2010, in a newsletter called JSS Barristers Rules. The second edition of the newsletter is available here. Of particular note is the following:

Our website, www.jssbarristers.ca, now also features a Cumulative Summary of Court Decisions which consider the Alberta Rules of Court. The Cumulative Summary of the Rules is organized by the Rule considered, and includes an expanded summary of the Decisions including key quotations from the Decisions. It will be updated regularly to ensure that it provides an ongoing and current resource for those interested in the consideration of the Rules of Court on a cumulative basis.

Those who are interested in receiving future editions of JSS Barristers Rules can subscribe here.

ABlawg readers may have noticed that we have not posted any comments lately on the new Alberta Rules of Court, Alta. Reg. 124/2010. We have decided to leave that task to our colleagues at JSS Barristers, who released the first issue of its JSS Rules newsletter in April, 2011. You can subscribe to JSS Rules here. Sabri Shawa, who has taught Civil Procedure as a sessional instructor in the Faculty of Law since 2003, advises that JSS Rules will be released quarterly (first in paper and eventually, on-line only) and JSS Barristers will provide updates on new rules cases to subscribers between newsletters. ABlawg may still provide commentary on some new rules cases that intersect with other areas we are blogging, but in the meantime we are pleased to wish our colleagues at JSS Barristers success with their comprehensive new rules initiative.

Omar Ha-Redeye recently wrote an interesting post for Slaw on Citing Blogs in Law Journals, which generated quite a bit of discussion about the role of blogs as legal authority. Here at ABlawg we’re aware of a couple of our posts that have been cited in factums and other legal arguments. Nigel Bankes’ post When is a non-operator entitled to a constructive trust over the operator’s own assets? was referred to in a factum filed by the appellant in its appeal of Brookfield Bridge Lending Fund Inc. v. Vanquish Oil and Gas Corporation, 2008 ABQB 444, and Jennifer Koshan’s post Rule of Law, Deference and Contempt: Another Chapter in the Black Bear Crossing Dispute was cited by counsel for the appellant in its application for leave to appeal Tsuu T’ina Nation v. Frasier, 2009 ABCA 140 to the Supreme Court of Canada. We are interested in hearing from ABlawg readers if you are aware of other ABlawg posts that have been cited in legal arguments, academic articles and other legal materials. And we’d also love to hear your views on the citation of blawgs as legal authority.

Case commented on: Nystrom v. Ranson, 2011 ABQB 116

The Plaintiff alleged physical injuries resulting from a motor vehicle accident. He claimed that his physical injuries limited his present and future vocational options and claimed past and future lost income. No psychological harm was expressly alleged in the statement of claim. The Plaintiff proposed to introduce expert evidence from an occupational therapist and a vocational counsellor at trial, in addition to the evidence of a physician and an orthopaedic surgeon. The Plaintiff agreed to an examination by two of the Defendants’ experts, an occupational therapist and a vocational therapist, but brought an application to limit the length and scope of those examinations.

Read the rest of this entry »

Case commented on: Terrace Consulting Inc. v. Jackson, 2011 ABQB 108

The Plaintiff applied for summary judgment to enforce its remedies under an offer to purchase a condominium. The Defendants alleged misrepresentation and contended that they were told they were signing a rent to own contract. They also counterclaimed for damages in the amount of the deposit paid, which they understood to be refundable. The Defendants argued that in light of the misrepresentation, summary judgment should not be granted. The Plaintiff argued that an entire agreement clause in the purchase contract precluded the defence of misrepresentation and summary judgment should be granted.

Read the rest of this entry »

Case commented on: Lameman v Alberta, 2011 ABQB 40

Alberta and Canada brought applications under the old Rules to strike the plaintiffs’ statement of claim in the summer of 2009. The matter has been in case management for over two years. The applications to strike were originally set to be heard March 15 - 19, 2010. This was subsequently adjourned until December 6 - 10, 2010 with deadlines fixed for filing briefs. The plaintiffs did not raise a concern about these deadlines at a case management meeting in September 2010 but subsequently brought an adjournment application on October 19, 2010, principally on the basis that they lacked adequate financial resources to proceed. Read the rest of this entry »

Case commented on: R. v. Hirsekorn, 2011 ABQB 156

R. v. Hirsekorn is a summary conviction appeal of convictions for shooting wildlife not in regular season and being in possession of wildlife without a valid permit, contrary to ss. 25(1) and 55(1) of the Wildlife Act, RSA 2000, c. W-10. At trial, Provincial Court Judge F. C. Fisher rejected Hirsekorn’s argument that the charges should be dismissed because he had an unextinguished Métis right to hunt for food under s.35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 (see 2010 ABPC 385). The Blood Tribe and Siksika Nation applied to the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench for intervenor status in the appeal.

Read the rest of this entry »

Case considered: Italian Centre Shop South Ltd. v. Moreira, 2011 ABQB 41

The Plaintiff, Italian Centre Shop South Ltd., sued the Defendant, Marcia Moreina, for allegedly stealing $173, 597.39 over the course of her employment with the Plaintiff. The Defendant was also charged criminally for defrauding the Italian Centre Shop South Ltd. of more than $5000. The Plaintiff applied for summary judgment and the Defendant applied for a stay of civil proceedings pending the resolution of criminal proceedings arising from the same facts. Read the rest of this entry »