Category Archives: Legal Education

eLitigation – Training Future Litigators for the Profession They Will Join

PDF Version: eLitigation – Training Future Litigators for the Profession They Will Join

Matter Commented On: Law 693 – eLitigation at the University of Calgary Faculty of Law

In March 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic changed our legal world in a way no one could have imagined. Our courthouse went from a beehive of litigation activities to a silent graveyard. Practice directives containing emergency measures were issued and activated to deal with the change. Our civil litigation system that has historically relied on an in-person process to undertake almost every task – from the filing and service of litigation documents to routine chambers applications and trials – suddenly moved online.

The legal profession was forced to adopt technologies to address administration and litigation needs at an unprecedented pace. The COVID-19 pandemic radically changed the way we practice and conduct litigation, and it appears from every indication that the change is here to stay. For law schools entrusted with the “sacred” duty of educating and training future lawyers, the most noticeable response to this change was a quick transition from in-person to online (or hybrid) methods of instruction. However, it should go beyond that to include a reform of the existing curriculum to adequately prepare law students for the legal profession in a post-COVID-19 world. As a civil litigation professor with a background in legal technology, my response during this crisis was to develop a new course designed to train future litigators with skills and competence to commence and conduct litigation electronically, and with minimal in-person contact. Welcome to Law 693 – eLitigation at the University of Calgary Faculty of Law!

Continue reading →

Does the Dower Act Still Serve a Useful Purpose? ALRI Wants to Hear From You!

By: Katherine MacKenzie

PDF Version: Does the Dower Act Still Serve a Useful Purpose? ALRI Wants to Hear From You!

Legislation Commented On: Dower Act, RSA 2000, c D-15

The Alberta Law Reform Institute (ALRI) is studying whether the Dower Act should be reformed or repealed. The project is still in its early stages, with a consultation document forthcoming in 2021. In the meantime, ALRI is seeking preliminary feedback on the Dower Act and any practical problems it may present.

Key Features of the Dower Act

The rights under the Dower Act only apply to married people (s 1(c)). The Act is intended to protect a spouse (the “dower spouse”) if the couple’s home is solely owned by the other spouse (the “owner spouse”). It applies to a “homestead”, which is a parcel of land where the owner spouse lived during the marriage (s 1(d)). The Dower Act protects the dower spouse from losing their home, either during the lifetime of the owner spouse or after the owner spouse’s death. There are two key features:

Consent to disposition: The owner spouse cannot dispose of a homestead without the consent of the dower spouse (s 2(1)). Disposition includes a transfer, long-term lease, or mortgage (s 1(b)). If the owner spouse disposes of a homestead without consent, they may be subject to a penalty and liable to pay damages to the dower spouse (ss 2(3), 11).
Life estate: The dower spouse is entitled to a life estate in the homestead after the death of the owner spouse (s 18).

The Dower Act has been part of the law of Alberta for more than 100 years, but it has not changed substantially since 1948.

Continue reading →

Law Schools’ Dirty Little Secret

By: Alice Woolley

PDF Version: Law Schools’ Dirty Little Secret

Left-leaning social justice warriors have captured Canadian law schools. So goes recent commentary in the National Post (see, e.g. recent columns by Barbara Kay, Bruce Pardy and Christie Blatchford). Law profs “espouse and impose a particular set of values or opinions and a way of thinking” (Blatchford, emphasis added). Continue reading →

Tracing the Likeness of Colten Boushie in the Law Classroom

By: Lisa A. Silver

PDF Version: Tracing the Likeness of Colten Boushie in the Law Classroom

On January 29, 2018, the nation’s gaze was decidedly fixed on Battleford, Saskatchewan where the second-degree murder trial of Gerald Stanley was commencing. From that first day of jury selection to the present, there is a general sense of shock, outrage and disbelief from so many corners of our country. In the legal community, there is much debate on the legal issues arising from the trial as well as concerns with jury selection, the ethical duties of jurors, and the presence of discriminatory practices that are embedded in our justice system. Many voices are being heard that are challenging the traditional common law perspective. Several of these voices are from the Indigenous community who are speaking from their heart and from their own personal experiences. As part of this reaction, the legal community is debating these issues through a variety of lenses and from all sides. Like most everyone touched by this case, I have read these accounts with interest. As a lawyer who practiced criminal law and now teaches it, my initial reaction is typically lawyerly: to parse the charge to the jury for legal errors, to debate the efficacy of peremptory challenges and to call for change in our justice system. But the overwhelming message, and in my view, the message which needs to be presented in the law classroom is not just one promoting a legalistic analysis but one providing a broader more meaningful message framing this case and this verdict as part of an overarching theme or subtext, which can be traced in the law classroom. Continue reading →

Letter of Support

PDF Version: Letter of Support

Editor’s note

This letter of support is endorsed by concerned faculty members at the University of Calgary Faculty of Law.

Letter of Support

As professors at the University of Calgary Faculty of Law we are concerned regarding the recent incident that occurred in one of our classes. A sitting judge of the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench and our then Judge in Residence, Justice Kristine Eidsvik, made comments to our second-year students that reflected racist myths and stereotypes about people, and particularly men, of colour.

Justice Eidsvik’s remarks are now being considered by the Canadian Judicial Council. We appreciate that further facts may to come to light through that process, and that it will serve to identify the appropriate response to Justice Eidsvik’s comments in relation to ensuring public respect for the administration of justice. We also note that Justice Eidsvik has resigned her position as Judge in Residence.

Nonetheless, over the past week we have assessed how best to respond to Justice Eidsvik’s reported remarks, and have reflected on our responsibilities as professors in light of what occurred in one of our classrooms.

Based on that assessment and reflection, as faculty members we believe it is important to emphasize the following:

Racist attitudes, including explicit and implicit bias, are an ongoing problem in our legal system.
Every actor in the legal system has a responsibility to work positively to redress racism, and to improve the justice and fairness of the law and how it is applied.
Judges bear a particular responsibility to ensure that they make decisions free of bias and in accordance with the values and principles enshrined in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, including the right to equality.
Legal educators are responsible to ensure that law school admissions and classrooms redress rather than reinforce inequality.
The judiciary, the legal profession and the legal academy ought to reflect and respect race, class and other forms of diversity.

We note Justice Eidsvik’s apology for her comments, but believe it essential to identify her initial remarks as categorically inconsistent with our core values, both institutionally and personally, as lawyers and legal educators. We express support for our students and colleagues who are personally impacted by the comments and thank those who came forward to express their concerns. We welcome dialogue with the students as we move forward.

As legal educators we are committed to ensuring that our classrooms reflect and reinforce equality as a core legal, constitutional and professional value. We are grateful for the steps taken by the two professors in this course, both of whom are new to the University of Calgary, to address this challenging situation swiftly and empathetically.

As concerned faculty members, we commit to taking our own steps to learn from this. We recommend that the Faculty include seminars on equality and bias in our annual teaching workshops, including strategies for dealing with racist and other comments reflective of inequality in the classroom.

Regardless of the outcome of the Canadian Judicial Council complaint, we encourage the Alberta Courts, along with the National Judicial Institute, to adopt educational initiatives to ensure that judges understand the problems of inequality and racialization in our legal system, and the central role of judges in redressing rather than reinforcing those inequalities.

This letter is written in support of our students and colleagues and we will not be speaking to the media about it.

To subscribe to ABlawg by email or RSS feed, please go to http://ablawg.ca