Category: Law Reform Page 2 of 3

By: Matthew Mazurek

Report Commented On: Alberta Law Reform Institute, Creation of Electronic Wills, Final Report 119

PDF Version: Electronic Wills, Electronic Signatures, and Emojis

On October 19, 2023, the Alberta Law Reform Institute published Final Report 119, Creation of Electronic Wills. In it, we recommend that the Wills and Succession Act, SA 2010, c W-12.2 (WSA) should explicitly permit electronic wills. To do this, the rules for the creation of electronic wills should largely mirror the formalities for a paper will. These formalities have been in use for centuries and seem to suffice for our probate system. The traditional wills formalities can be used in the electronic medium. In fact, similar formalities have been used in the electronic medium in other legal contexts. More specifically, we recommend that formal electronic wills should be:

readable as electronic text;
signed by the testator using an electronic signature; and
signed by two witnesses, who are both present at the same time for the testator’s signature, using an electronic signature.

Submission to Justice Canada on the Criminalization of Coercive Control

By Janet Mosher

On November 2, 2023

In Criminal, Law Reform

By: Janet Mosher, Shushanna Harris, Jennifer Koshan, and Wanda Wiegers

Bill Commented On: Bill C-332, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (controlling or coercive conduct), First Session, Forty-fourth Parliament (2023)

PDF Version: Submission to Justice Canada on the Criminalization of Coercive Control

Justice Canada has been holding an engagement process on the issue of whether an offence of coercive control should be added to the Criminal Code, RSC 1985, c C-46. This offence has been proposed in a series of private members bills, most recently, Bill C-332. Our submission (link below) argues that it is imperative that actors in all legal domains acquire a nuanced and contextual understanding of coercive control derived from an intersectional analysis that attends to how multiple systems of oppression interact to shape the tactics of coercion and control. However, we do not support the criminalization of coercive control, either as a standalone offence or within a broader offence of domestic abuse/violence. We argue that it is the former approach – the acquisition of deep and contextualized knowledge by legal system actors – and not criminalization, that holds promise in enhancing safety for women and children.

EIA Law Class Recommendations for Reforming Provincial Environmental Assessment

By David V Wright

On October 12, 2023

In Environmental, Law Reform

By: David V. Wright and the EIA Law Class

Matter Considered: Nova Scotia Environmental Assessment (EA) Modernization initiative and other existing and future initiatives to reform provincial assessment regimes

PDF Version: EIA Law Class Recommendations for Reforming Provincial Environmental Assessment

Last week, my Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Law class generated recommendations to submit to the Nova Scotia Environmental Assessment (EA) Modernization initiative. To do so, we employed a “policy lab” approach, which entails an open and collaborative space where students can be innovative and apply the expertise and knowledge they’ve gained through the course to date. The idea is essentially collaborative problem-solving that resembles what students will hopefully encounter in their future careers in law and policy reform, be it in private, public, not-for-profit, or other settings. In class, students worked in small groups focused on particular issues and areas (e.g. climate change, public participation) and then generated preliminary draft recommendations, workshopped those drafts with peers and professor, and then fine-tuned to finalize. The final version was submitted to the Nova Scotia engagement process. Nova Scotia was a natural focus because that jurisdiction is currently engaged in reform. Notably, this EA “modernization” is actually required by law, as it is an explicit commitment set out in s 12 of Nova Scotia’s Environmental Goals and Climate Change Reduction Act, SNS 2021, c 20 (EGCCRA) (for context about using a legislated approach to strengthen environmental governance, see this excellent article by Meinhard Doelle and William Lahey).

The Amendments to Bill 1

By Martin Olszynski

On December 12, 2022

In Constitutional, Law Reform

By: Martin Olszynski and Nigel Bankes

Matter commented on: The Government Amendments to Bill 1, Alberta Sovereignty within a United Canada Act

PDF Version: The Amendments to Bill 1

As anticipated at the time that we posted our original critique of Bill 1, the Smith administration tabled a set of amendments to Bill 1 that were adopted in the Committee of the Whole and included in the version adopted on third reading early in the morning of December 8, 2022. The amendments were tabled in the form of a single document and included two main changes: (1) a change to the harm trigger; and (2) the removal of the Henry VIII provisions.

Running Afoul the Separation, Division, and Delegation of Powers: The Alberta Sovereignty Within a United Canada Act

By Martin Olszynski

On December 6, 2022

In Constitutional, Law Reform, Statutory Interpretation

By: Martin Olszynski and Nigel Bankes

Legislation Commented on: Bill 1 – Alberta Sovereignty Within a United Canada Act

PDF Version: Running Afoul the Separation, Division, and Delegation of Powers: The Alberta Sovereignty Within a United Canada Act

On Tuesday, November 29, 2022, the provincial government unveiled its highly anticipated and controversial “Alberta Sovereignty Within a United Canada Act” (Bill 1). The promise to introduce some form of sovereignty legislation was the key plank of Premier Danielle Smith’s UCP leadership campaign this past summer and fall. An initial ABlawg post that drew from the general contours of the legislation, as found in a 2021 policy document called the “Free Alberta Strategy,” expressed concerns that “the clearest and most immediate effects of such ideas is not sovereignty, nor changes to the confederation bargain, but rather a damaging blow to the rule of law and the basic building blocks of democratic governance.”