ABLawg

Domestic Violence and Access to Justice: A Mapping of Relevant Laws, Policies and Justice System Components Across Canada

Matter Commented On: eBook on Domestic Violence Law across Canada, 2020 CanLIIDocs 3160

November 25 to December 10 marks the 16 Days of Activism Against Gender-based Violence provincially, federally and internationally. This is therefore an apt time for the publication of our new eBook on domestic violence law across Canada on Can LII (available at 2020 CanLIIDocs 316 0). This eBook is the first resource to systematically document all of the laws and government policies that pertain to domestic violence across the country as a first step in providing access to justice. Several of the laws and policies we discuss in the eBook have been previously addressed in ABlawg posts (see e.g. Clare ’s Law: Unintended Consequ ences for Domestic Violence Victims?; Manda tory Dispute Resolution Coming Back to Alberta, But What About Domestic Violence Cases?; Alberta’s Family Violence Laws: Intersections, Inconsistencies and Access to Justice). This post reproduces the Introduction and User Guide for this new eBook, which is aimed at people working with and supporting survivors of domestic violence, as well as researchers and government actors.

Water for Coal Developments: Where Will It Come From?

By Nigel Bankes

On December 4, 2020

In Energy, Environmental, Protection of Species

By: Nigel Bankes and Cheryl Bradley

PDF Version: Water for Coal Developments: Where Will It Come From?

Matters Commented On: A Coal Development Policy for Alberta (1976, rescinded June 1, 2020); Oldman River Basin Water Allocation Order, Alta Reg 319/2003

The Government of Alberta (GoA) is hell-bent on facilitating the development of new coal mines in the Province. To that end, it purported to rescind the long-standing Coal Development Policy (CDP) of 1976 effective June 1, 2020. The CDP prevented development of coal resources in Category I lands on the eastern slopes of the Rockies and only permitted the development of new underground mines (rather than open-pit mines) in Category II lands (see Figure 1, below, also available here).

eLitigation – Training Future Litigators for the Profession They Will Join

By Gideon Christian

On December 1, 2020

In Legal Education

By: Gideon Christian

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!

Canada’s Proposed New Consumer Privacy Protection Act: The Good, the Bad, the Missed Opportunities

By Emily Laidlaw

On November 30, 2020

In Internet Law, Privacy

By: Emily Laidlaw

PDF Version: Canada’s Proposed New Consumer Privacy Protection Act: The Good, the Bad, the Missed Opportunities

Bill Commented On: Bill C-11, Digital Charter Implementation Act, 2020, 2nd Sess, 43rd Parl, 2020 (first reading 17 November 2020)

On November 17, 2020, the Federal Government unveiled the most sweeping consumer privacy law reform in the last twenty years with the proposed Digital Charter Implementation Act, 2020 (Bill C-11). The Act would repeal and replace parts of the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, SC 2000, c 5 (PIPEDA) with a new private sector privacy statute, the Consumer Privacy Protection Act (CPPA) (not to be confused with the well-known California Consumer Protection Act (CCPA)), and would enact the Personal Information and Data Protection Tribunal Act (Tribunal Act). The Bill makes good strides in modernizing Canada’s privacy legislation. It is also, in the end, a missed opportunity for more profound law reform.

If passed, it will necessitate modernization of Alberta’s Personal Information Protection Act, SA 2003, c P-6.5 (PIPA). PIPA is designated substantially similar legislation, meaning that PIPA rather than PIPEDA regulates personal information within our provincial borders (and through our ombudsman, the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Alberta). Without this designation, PIPEDA would apply to all consumer privacy transactions within Alberta. As will be detailed below, Bill C-11 fundamental revamps consumer privacy legislation and therefore unless Alberta follows suit, it is highly unlikely the substantially similar designation can be maintained.

COVID-19 and Cabinet Secrets

By Shaun Fluker

On November 27, 2020

In COVID-19

By: Shaun Fluker

PDF Version: COVID-19 and Cabinet Secrets

Matter Commented On: CMOH Order 38-2020

The Opposition is calling for the release of public health recommendations made by the Chief Medical Officer of Health to cabinet which informed the decision announced on November 24 to declare a second public health emergency and to impose enhanced measures to contain the spread of COVID-19. These enhanced measures are described at COVID-19 info for Albertans: Mandatory public health measures and those which came into force on November 24 are set out in CMOH Order 38-2020. In response to questions from the media at the November 26 update, both the Minister of Health and the Chief Medical Officer of Health stated the recommendations cannot be disclosed because of cabinet confidence – a constitutional convention in a Westminster government which keeps cabinet deliberations in secret for purposes of governance (see here for a discussion of these important functions). This convention is also codified in section 22 of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, RSA 2000, c F-25. What does the common law say on this?