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.
Author: Admin Page 16 of 19
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.
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.
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.
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.