Author: Jonnette Watson Hamilton Page 2 of 43

B.A. (Alta.), LL.B. (Dal.), LL.M. (Col.).
Professor Emerita.
Please click here for more information.

Decision Commented On: University of Toronto (Governing Council) v Doe et al., 2024 ONSC 3755 (CanLII)

PDF Version: Let Them Eat Breakfast? Encampments on Campus Part 3

Stampede Week in Calgary just ended. Pancake breakfasts and other festivities went ahead despite a recent water emergency. At times like this, folks often point to Calgary’s can-do attitude. Indeed, some observers have suggested that this same can-do attitude prevailed, in a good way, when the University of Calgary (UCalgary) called in the Calgary Police Service (CPS) to enforce a trespass notice within less than 24 hours of an on-campus encampment being established on May 9, 2024 (see e.g., the comments of Councillor Terry Wong at the May Calgary Police Commission hearing at 46:13, 49:15). Who needs an expensive court-ordered injunction when the police are willing to heed the call of property owners? Well, the University of Toronto (U of T) decided that it did, seemingly because the Toronto police – unlike the CPS – refused to intervene without a court order in a 50+ day encampment on that campus (University of Toronto v Doe et al., 2024 ONSC 3755 (CanLII) at para 212). U of T got its interlocutory injunction on July 2 and then others, such as Memorial University (here), suggested that the U of T injunction decision supported their actions in removing protesters. We expect UCalgary will also rely on the U of T decision to justify its actions after the fact.

Encampments on Campus Part 2

By Jonnette Watson Hamilton

On June 28, 2024

In Protest

By: Jennifer Koshan and Jonnette Watson Hamilton

Document Commented On: University of Calgary, Temporary structures and overnight protests, 2024-UC-003-A

PDF Version: Encampments on Campus Part 2

Last week we posted commentary about the University of Calgary’s May 9, 2024 response to an on-campus encampment (see “Encampments on Campus: Trespass, Universities, and the Charter”). An ABlawg reader subsequently sent us a copy of a University document entitled “Temporary structures and overnight protests” (Direction), which was apparently handed out to protestors on May 9. The document does not seem to be available on the University’s Policies and Procedures webpage, which is why we are calling it a direction rather than a policy. And while the document does not have “direction” in its title, it internally references itself as a “direction”, as we describe below.

Encampments on Campus: Trespass, Universities, and the Charter

By Jonnette Watson Hamilton

On June 21, 2024

In Constitutional, Protest

By: Jennifer Koshan and Jonnette Watson Hamilton

Matter Commented On: University of Calgary and Calgary Police Service Response to an On Campus Encampment on May 9, 2024

PDF Version: Encampments on Campus: Trespass, Universities, and the Charter

Campus encampments have proliferated this spring, demanding that universities divest from funds supporting Israel’s military operations in Gaza. In Alberta, the University of Calgary called in the police to dismantle a student encampment in the University quad on May 9, 2024 less than 24 hours after it went up, and similar action followed at the University of Alberta two days later. Concerns were raised about the use of force by the universities and police (see e.g., a letter from law professors here and from a former justice of the Alberta Court of Appeal here). The universities defended their actions on the basis that they had properly invoked their powers under trespass law and university policies. According to a message to the campus community from University of Calgary President Ed McCauley on May 10, 2024:

What Does La Rose Tell Us About Climate Change Litigation in Canada?

By Jonnette Watson Hamilton

On February 2, 2024

In Constitutional, Environmental, Equality

By: Nigel Bankes, Jennifer Koshan, Jonnette Watson Hamilton, and Martin Olszynski

Case Commented On: La Rose v Canada, 2023 FCA 241 (CanLII)

PDF Version: What Does La Rose Tell Us About Climate Change Litigation in Canada?

The last decade has seen an explosion of domestic climate change litigation around the world and an equally rich body of academic literature examining the case law from a variety of disciplinary perspectives. The Sabin Center for Climate Change Law maintains an excellent data base covering these developments. Important cases in other jurisdictions include the Urgenda decision (Urgenda v Netherlands (2019)) and Shell decision (Milieudefensie et al v Shell (2021)) in the Netherlands, and the 2021 decision of the German constitutional court (Neubauer et al v Germany). Australian environmental non-governmental organizations (ENGOs) have been particularly active in bringing climate change issues before the courts, especially in the context of proposed natural gas and coal projects, most famously in the Sharma case (Sharma by her litigation representative Sister Marie Brigid Arthur v Minister for the Environment [2021] FCA 560, appeal allowed, [2022] FCAFC 35).

The Basics of Alberta’s Torrens Title System: Three Cases

By Jonnette Watson Hamilton

On July 4, 2023

In Property

By: Jonnette Watson Hamilton and Nigel Bankes

Cases commented on: St Pierre v Schenk, 2020 ABCA 382 (CanLII); Calgary (City) v Teulon, 2021 ABQB 388 (CanLII); St Pierre v North Alberta Land Registry District (Registrar), 2023 ABCA 153 (CanLII)

PDF Version: The Basics of Alberta’s Torrens Title System: Three Cases

These three decisions about the basic elements of Alberta’s Torrens title system cover a wide range of issues. The two Alberta Court of Appeal decisions – one a reserved judgment – arise from the same set of facts, which feature a case of forgery. The first decision looks at whether the registration of a caveat will cure the caveator’s defective title, and the second discusses the Registrar’s liability for the caveator’s loss of an interest in land. The Court of King’s Bench decision stems from facts that are less straight-forward. It considers three statutory exceptions to the principle of indefeasibility that underlies Alberta’s Torrens title system: prior certificate of title, misdescription, and one of the listed exceptions in section 61 of the Land Titles Act, RSA 2000, c L-4 (LTA) (an alleged public highway).