ABLawg

Clawbies 2019

On January 2, 2020

ABlawg is delighted to announce that Nigel Bankes was awarded a 2019 Canadian Law Blog Award (Clawbie) in the category of Best Bloggers on a Platform or Shared Blog. The awards committee noted his “great analysis of everything going on in energy law, particularly in Alberta” and that “readers call him “the blogger’s blogger” who sets the standard for his fellow authors at ABlawg.” We could not agree more – congratulations Nigel!

We also congratulate U Calgary Law’s Pro Bono Students Canada team, whose podcast Hearsay won a Clawbie in the Best Student Projects category, and our alumnus and ABlawgger Joshua Sealy-Harrington for his success in the Best Twitter Accounts category.

Congratulations to all the Clawbie winners and thanks to our readers for your nominations and continued support.

Coercive Control: What Should a Good Lawyer Do?

By Deanne Sowter

On January 2, 2020

In Ethics and the Legal Profession, Family, State Responses to Violence

By: Deanne Sowter

PDF Version: Coercive Control: What Should a Good Lawyer Do?

Matter Commented On: Federation of Law Societies Model Code of Professional Conduct, Rule 3.3-3

I am currently conducting research to determine whether coercive control can be considered psychological harm for the purpose of the future harm exception to confidentiality and solicitor-client privilege. (FLSC Model Code R 3.3-3; Smith v Jones, [1999] 1 SCR 455 (SCC)) My research is supported by the OBA Fellowship in Legal Ethics and Professionalism Studies. In that research I’m determining whether a lawyer can disclose, but doing that research has provoked me to wonder whether a lawyer should disclose.

ABlawg: Year in Review 2019

By Admin

On December 23, 2019

In Uncategorized

By: Admin

PDF Version: ABlawg: Year in Review 2019

Introduction

This was another busy year for ABlawg, with a total of 113 posts in 2019 to date. Nigel Bankes surpassed the 300 mark for lifetime posts in 2019 and one of his posts from 2017 was cited by the Supreme Court of Canada in Redwater (aka Orphan Well Association v Grant Thornton Ltd, 2019 SCC 5 (CanLII)), the second time the SCC has cited ABlawg (see also Mikisew Cree First Nation v. Canada (Governor General in Council), 2018 SCC 40 (CanLII), citing another of Professor Bankes’ posts).

Here are some other highlights of the year on ABlawg.

The Alberta Inquiry and Freedom of Expression

By Jennifer Koshan

On December 17, 2019

In Constitutional, Energy

By: Jennifer Koshan and Linda McKay-Panos

PDF Version: The Alberta Inquiry and Freedom of Expression

Matter Commented On: Alberta Inquiry into Anti-Alberta Energy Campaigns

Our colleagues Martin Olszynski and Shaun Fluker have posted concerns about the Alberta Inquiry into Anti-Alberta Energy Campaigns from the perspective of the rule of law and procedural fairness (see here and here). Amnesty International has also raised concerns about the Inquiry’s “aggressive approach to defending the oil and gas industry from criticism” and the impact this approach will have on human rights defenders – especially those who are Indigenous, women, and/or environmental activists. Ecojustice flagged similar concerns about freedom of expression in its letter to Inquiry Commissioner Steve Allan.

Binding The Courts: The Use of Precedent in Sentencing Starting Points

By Lisa Silver

On December 16, 2019

In Criminal, Sentencing

By: Lisa Silver

PDF Version: Binding The Courts: The Use of Precedent in Sentencing Starting Points

Cases Commented On: R v Felix, 2019 ABCA 458; R v Parranto, 2019 ABCA 457

The Alberta Court of Appeal recently released two companion decisions on sentencing starting points in R v Felix, 2019 ABCA 458, and R v Parranto, 2019 ABCA 457. In Felix and Parranto, the Alberta Court of Appeal considers the appropriate sentencing starting point for an offender involved in the wholesale trafficking of fentanyl, an insidious and dangerous drug responsible for the deaths of many Albertans. These decisions are prime examples of how an appellate court grapples with precedential authority in arriving at the final outcome. In this post, I will discuss these cases as exemplars of this precedential process, which lies at the heart of the rule of law under our common law system. These decisions give us a glimpse of the complexities of precedent, in cases where there is no issue of whether precedent should be followed but rather on the issue of how best to follow it.