Author Archives: Alice Woolley

About Alice Woolley

LL.M. (Yale), LL.B. (Toronto), B.A. (Toronto). Professor. Member of the Alberta Bar. Please click here for more information.

The Legality of Legal Advising

PDF version: The Legality of Legal Advising

Matter considered: Edgar Schmidt v Canada (AG) Federal Court File #T-2225-12.

Introduction

On December 13, 2012 Edgar Schmidt, a Department of Justice lawyer, filed a Statement of Claim in Federal Court naming the federal Attorney General as Defendant. The Statement of Claim alleges that the Minister of Justice and the Deputy Minister of Justice have violated their obligations under various pieces of legislation that impose duties on the Minister of Justice to examine proposed legislation to determine if it is “inconsistent with the purposes and provisions” of the Canadian Bill of Rights or the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and to advise the House of Commons if it is so (see in particular: section 3 of the Canadian Bill of Rights, SC 1960, c 44; section 4.1 of the Department of Justice Act, RSC 1985 c J-2; section 3(2) and (3) of the Statutory Instruments Act, RSC 1985 c S-22).

Continue reading →

Getting Foreclosure Practice Right: Some Regulatory Suggestions

PDF version: Getting Foreclosure Practice Right: Some Regulatory Suggestions

Case commented on: AGF Trust Company v Soos, 2012 ABQB 747.

AGF Trust Company v Soos is a decision by Master Lorne Smart, reviewing a Bill of Costs in a standard residential foreclosure action – not the sort of decision that usually attracts our attention at ABlawg. But the Master does two things that make this decision worth commenting on. First, he makes an example of procedural irregularities in the action to reduce the legal fees claimed in the Bill of Costs. Second, he uses his review to comment on some troublesome economic aspects of foreclosure practice.

Continue reading →

The Top Ten Canadian Legal Ethics Stories – 2012

PDF version: The Top Ten Canadian Legal Ethics Stories – 2012

At the blog Legal Ethics Forum John Steele recently published a list of the top ten legal ethics stories in America in 2012 (here). With contributions from Adam Dodek (University of Ottawa), Malcolm Mercer (McCarthy Tetrault), Richard Devlin (Dalhousie), and other members of the Canadian Legal Ethics Listserv, here is my articulation of a Canadian edition:

Continue reading →

The immorality (and morality) of morality-based judging

PDF version: The immorality (and morality) of morality-based judging

Case commented on: R v Zentner, 2012 ABCA 332

Introduction

On November 22, 2012, in its decision in R v Zentner, 2012 ABCA 332, the Alberta Court of Appeal reversed the sentencing decision of Provincial Court Judge G.K. Krinke, in which Judge Krinke imposed a conditional discharge on a funeral director convicted of fraud. The Court did so on the grounds that Judge Krinke failed to follow applicable (and binding) precedent and did not comply with the requirements of the Criminal Code. The Court held that the “legal foundation of the sentence imposed was either non-existent, or was installed upside down” (para 60).

Continue reading →

In Memoriam: The Law Society of Alberta Code of Professional Conduct, 1995-2011 (1995 Code)

PDF version: In Memoriam: The Law Society of Alberta Code of Professional Conduct, 1995-2011 (1995 Code)

Comment on: The new Law Society of Alberta Code of Conduct.

In the fall of 2011 the Law Society of Alberta implemented a new Code of Professional Conduct. The new Code is based on the Model Code of the Canadian Federation of Law Societies. Its implementation resulted in the repeal of the prior Law Society of Alberta Code of Conduct (“1995 Code”), the implementation of which in 1995 may be the most innovative step ever taken by a Canadian law society. The 1995 Code rejected the Canadian Bar Association Model Code, which all Canadian law societies had to that point followed, more or less, with its narrow scope and tendency towards the aspirational. Instead the 1995 Code set out clear and comprehensive guidelines establishing the essential obligations of lawyers working across practice contexts, and covering the spectrum of the tasks that lawyers do.

Continue reading →