University of Calgary Faculty of Law ABLawg.ca logo over mountains

The WTO Panel Decision on the EU’s Rules on the Marketing of Seal Products: Who Won and Who Lost?

By Elizabeth Whitsitt and Nigel Bankes

PDF Version: The WTO Panel Decision on the EU’s Rules on the Marketing of Seal Products: Who Won and Who Lost?

Decisions commented on:  World Trade Organization (WTO) Panel Report, European Communities – Measures Prohibiting the Importation and Marketing of Seal Products, 25 November 2013,  and Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami et al v European Commission, Case T-526/10, Judgement of the General Court (EU), (Seventh Chamber), 25 April 2013, available here (currently on appeal)

Regulations commented on: Regulation (EC) No 1007/2009 on trade in seal products, (Framework Regulation) and Commission Regulation (EU) No 737/2010 of 10 August 2010 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Regulation (EC) No 1007/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council on trade in seal products (Implementing Regulation) (collectively the Sealing Regulations) (both available here along with other background information and reports)

The WTO Panel handed down its decision in the complaints made by Canada and Norway in relation to the European Union’s ban on placing seal products on the market on November 25, 2013.  The reaction in the media was immediate with most outlets indicating that the Panel had upheld the ban.  The CBC, for example, reported that “[t]he WTO, while finding that the EU’s so-called Seal Regime had violated international trade agreements, also determined that the ban was valid because of a controversial public morals clause”. Gloria Galloway in the Globe and Mail reported that “[a] WTO ruling released on Monday says the ban the EU imposed in 2010 undermines the principles of fair trade, but is justified because it ‘fulfills the objective of addressing EU public moral concerns on seal welfare’”.

The Supreme Court (sort of) Thinks About Lawyers as Advisors

By Alice Woolley

PDF Version: The Supreme Court (sort of) Thinks About Lawyers as Advisors

Case commented on: Wood v Schaeffer, 2013 SCC 71

When police officers in Ontario kill or injure someone in the course of their duties, the Special Investigations Unit (SIU) investigates their conduct.  The government created the civilian SIU to avoid the problems – both real and perceived – in the investigation of police officers by police officers.  The creation of the SIU does not, however, eliminate the complexity of investigating alleged crimes by police.  The Supreme Court of Canada addressed one of these complexities in its recent decision in Wood v Schaeffer, 2013 SCC 71: how does a police officer’s regular duty to make notes during an investigation operate when the officer may him or herself become a subject of, or direct witness to, the matters investigated?  In particular, what opportunity ought a police officer have to consult counsel when preparing notes in those circumstances?

The Top Ten Canadian Legal Ethics Stories – 2013

By Alice Woolley

PDF Version: The Top Ten Canadian Legal Ethics Stories – 2013

Once again John Steele at Legal Ethics Forum has compiled his list of the top ten ethics stories of 2013 (here).  As was the case last year, his list has inspired me to think about the top ten ethics stories in Canada (2012 is here).  On reviewing last year’s list it is clear that a number of the stories of significance in 2012 remained important this year.  As well, legal ethics in Canada continues to develop as a matter of practical and intellectual significance, with practitioners, judges, regulators and academics paying attention to the conduct and regulation of lawyers and judges. 

Protecting Alberta’s Environment Act: A Keystone Kops Response to Environmental Monitoring and Reporting in Alberta

By Shaun Fluker

PDF Version: Protecting Alberta’s Environment Act: A Keystone Kops Response to Environmental Monitoring and Reporting in Alberta

Legislation commented on: Protecting Alberta’s Environment Act, SA 2013, c P-26.8

The Protecting Alberta’s Environment Act received royal assent on December 11, 2013, and the statute will come into force on proclamation at a later date. The title of this new legislation suggests it is a reworking of environmental protection laws, along the lines of the Alberta Land Stewardship Act, SA 2009, c A-26.8, which enacted a new framework for land use planning in 2009, or the Responsible Energy Development Act, SA 2012, c R-17.3,which reconfigured energy project regulation this year in Alberta. Anyone with these kinds of expectations will be disappointed though. The sweepingly broad title is misleading as the Act really just targets environmental monitoring and reporting, and is the Alberta legislature’s response to the 2012 Report issued by the Alberta Working Group on Environmental Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting (see here). What follows are my comments on the Protecting Alberta’s Environment Act. My overall synopsis is that the Act accomplishes very little, reads as if it was put together in a hurry, and unfortunately allows politics to override science and transparency when it comes to environmental monitoring and reporting. 

ABlawg Wins 2013 Clawbie for Best Law School/Law Professor Blog

ABlawg is thrilled and honoured to have won the Canadian Law Blogs Award (Clawbie) for Best Law School/Law Professor Blog for the second year in a row. Here is what the Clawbie judges had to say:

13) Best Law School/Law Professor Blog

ABlawg, the University of Calgary Faculty of Law Blog. No other Canadian law blog received as many nominations as this one, many of them from practicing lawyers who find ABlawg’s updates and insights highly valuable. This is not just the best academic law blog in Canada, a category that is very difficult to win; it’s one of the best law blogs around, period.

ABlawg is very much a collective effort, and so we collectively express our thanks to the Clawbie judges, all of those who nominated us, and most importantly, our dedicated readers.

Happy New Year to all.

Page 292 of 437

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén