Author Archives: Admin

Bill C-7 Amends Medical Assistance in Dying Laws in Canada

By: Fiona Balaton and Lorian Hardcastle

 PDF Version: Bill C-7 Amends Medical Assistance in Dying Laws in Canada

Legislation Commented On: Bill C-7, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying), 2nd Sess, 43rd Parl, 2021 (assented to 17 March 2021)

On March 17, 2021, changes to Canada’s Criminal Code provisions on Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) under Bill C-7 received Royal Assent and are now in effect. These changes mark a significant milestone in Canada’s MAiD laws, which have been under constant debate and criticism since the Supreme Court of Canada held in Carter v Canada (Attorney General), 2015 SCC 5 (CanLII), that in certain circumstances, the criminal laws prohibiting assistance in dying limited the rights to life, liberty and security of the person under section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in a manner that was not demonstrably justified under section 1 of the Charter.  This blog post reviews the judicial and legislative history of MAiD in Canada, outlines the major new changes, and discusses some ongoing concerns with the MAiD laws. Continue reading →

Federal Government Declines Emergency Order for Southern Mountain Caribou

By: Shaun Fluker

 PDF Version: Federal Government Declines Emergency Order for Southern Mountain Caribou

Matter Commented On: Government of Canada, Statement: Government of Canada’s approach to addressing the imminent threats to the recovery of Southern Mountain Caribou (18 March 2021)

The federal government recently added a Statement on Southern Mountain Caribou to the species at risk public registry announcing that the Governor in Council has declined to issue an emergency protection order under section 80 of the Species at Risk Act, SC 2002, c 29. This statement was a response to the recommendation for the order made by the federal Minister of the Environment following her finding in March 2018 that the southern mountain caribou face an imminent threat to their recovery. I wasn’t planning to comment on this announcement because it is fully consistent with the federal strategy of deference to the provinces on the woodland caribou file, a strategy which I debunked recently in Canada and Alberta Agree to More Pie-In-The-Sky on Woodland Caribou. Accordingly, this announcement was not surprising, or particularly newsworthy in Alberta. However, I changed my tune last Friday afternoon while perusing my inbox looking for a weekly fix of Alberta government spin, and Jason Nixon, the Alberta Minister of Environment and Parks, did not disappoint with his comments in Federal recognition of Alberta’s caribou recovery efforts: Minister Nixon, expressing that the federal Statement is a recognition of Alberta’s strong caribou recovery efforts to date.

Continue reading →

Reforming Personal Property Security Law

By: Tamara Buckwold and Roderick Wood

PDF Version: Reforming Personal Property Security Law

Report Commented On: Alberta Law Reform Institute, Personal Property Security Law, Report for Discussion 35 (December 2020)

Every Canadian province and territory, except for Quebec, has enacted a Personal Property Security Act. Although there are minor variations across jurisdictions, these statutes are substantially uniform. Alberta’s Personal Property Security Act, RSA 2000, c P-7 (PPSA) originally came into force in October 1990. Its enactment transformed secured transactions law in Alberta by sweeping away many of the restrictions and limitations that impeded the use of secured credit. It replaced the piecemeal approach that formerly governed with a comprehensive and rational system that fostered certainty, transparency and flexibility. The success of the legislation is confirmed by the transplantation of the Canadian model into other jurisdictions such as New Zealand and Australia.

Although the PPSA produced a significant improvement in the law, experience with the legislation over the course of the last three decades has revealed several instances where improvements or clarifications are desirable. In some cases, the need for reform is driven by technological advances. When the PPSA was first enacted, electronic banking and electronic commerce were in their infancy. In other cases, judicial decisions have revealed ambiguities in the legislation that have produced uncertainty. Further, the statute simply did not anticipate the kinds of controversies that would be litigated in the future, and therefore did not provide rules for the resolution of these types of disputes.

Continue reading →

ABlawg: Year in Review 2020

By: Admin

PDF Version: ABlawg: Year in Review 2020

Dedication

This year in review post is dedicated to the memory of Joseph J. Arvay, Q.C., O.C., O.B.C., who passed away suddenly on December 7, 2020. As the In Memoriam page on the website of his firm Arvay Finlay notes, Joe was “one of the most brilliant and successful constitutional and civil liberties lawyers of his time.” He represented parties in “some of the defining cases of our generation including, among many others, medical assistance in dying, access to legal safe injection sites, the right of workers to associate in pursuit of workplace goals, and LGBTQ rights.”

For many bloggers on this site, Joe was both a hero and a role model.

ABlawg is pleased to provide this compilation of highlights from 2020, summarizing and synthesizing bloggers’ contributions in different areas of law during the past year. Overall, it was a busy year that included important commentary on a range of matters, including, of course, various dimensions of COVID-19. Continue reading →

Is Now the Time to Consider Anti-SLAPP Legislation in Alberta? A Reflection on Pointes Protection

By: Daniella Marchand and Nafisa Abdul Razak

PDF Version: Is Now the Time to Consider Anti-SLAPP Legislation in Alberta? A Reflection on Pointes Protection

Case Commented On:  1704604 Ontario Limited v. Pointes Protection Association, et al; 1704604 Ontario Ltd. v Pointes Protection Association, 2018 ONCA 685 (CanLII)

In November of last year, the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) heard a case between 1704604 Ontario Limited and the Pointes Protection Association involving Ontario’s attempt at curbing Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs). As we expect a decision from the SCC soon, it is an appropriate time to reflect on how the Pointes Protectioncase has the potential to impact implementation of anti-SLAPP legislation in Alberta. At the center of the case was a recent revision to Ontario’s Rules of Court, which has been commonly referred to as an ‘anti-SLAPP’ provision. Continue reading →