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

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.

Holiday Hiatus

ABlawg will be taking a break from Christmas Day to New Year’s. We’d like to take this opportunity to thank all of our followers for your readership and support this year. We are honoured to have received so many Clawbie nominations from so many diverse sources. When we return in the new year, you can look forward to a series of posts on the NEB’s Northern Gateway Pipeline decision, amongst other commentary. We wish all of our readers a wonderful holiday season.

Teaching Bedford: Reflections on the Supreme Court’s Most Recent Charter Decision

By: Jennifer Koshan

PDF Version: Teaching Bedford: Reflections on the Supreme Court’s Most Recent Charter Decision

Case Commented On: Canada (Attorney General) v Bedford, 2013 SCC 72

Much commentary has already been written on the Supreme Court’s decision in Bedford and the implications the case has for the regulation of prostitution in Canada. My interest in this post is to reflect on how to approach Bedford when teaching constitutional law next term. I think Bedford brings some clarity to the case law on section 7 of the Charter, and as Sonia Lawrence has noted here, the decision helps dispel some of the problematic thinking around “choice” and causation in constitutional cases, though I would have liked to see the Court go further here. The Court also could have done more by way of taking a contextual approach in its consideration of the prostitution laws. The evidence presented in the case clearly provided a compelling enough picture of the harms of these laws for the Court to find a violation of section 7, but it is disappointing to see no explicit references to the gendered and racialized nature of prostitution nor to the rich and diverse literature in this area, some of which was cited in the submissions of interveners (see e.g. here, here and here). Finally, the case can also be seen as an example of the relative success that section 7 claims have had of late at the Supreme Court, especially in comparison to the lack of success of section 15 claims.

A Rare Public Challenge to a Municipal Water Franchise Agreement

PDF Version: A Rare Public Challenge to a Municipal Water Franchise Agreement 

Decision considered: Rocky View County – Water and Wastewater Franchise Agreement with Harmony Advanced Water Systems Corporation (29 November 2013), Decision 2013-424

This decision is significant because, in this rare instance of a public objection to a municipal utility franchise agreement, the Alberta Utilities Commission took a progressive approach and granted public interest standing to an objector who did not have a statutory right to standing.

Should Homelessness be an Analogous Ground? Clarifying the Multi-Variable Approach to Section 15 of the Charter

By: Joshua Sealy-Harrington

PDF Version: Should Homelessness be an Analogous Ground? Clarifying the Multi-Variable Approach to Section 15 of the Charter 

Case Commented On: Tanudjaja v Canada (Attorney General), 2013 ONSC 5410

This post discusses a decision from the Ontario Superior Court which rejected “homelessness” as an analogous ground under section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. I divide the analysis into two sections: (1) a discussion of the analytical flaws in the court’s approach to analogous grounds, and (2) an application of a multi-variable approach to the potential ground of homelessness to demonstrate its apparent viability as an analogous ground. This case should be of concern to ABlawg readers interested in section 15 jurisprudence as well as those advocating for the interests of the homeless.                                                                   

Page 297 of 441

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén