Tuesday, 03 January 2017 09:00

Third-party litigation funding

Image: Jeannie Phan
Image: Jeannie Phan
The first statutory restrictions against maintenance and champerty were enacted in England in 1305, as a result of royal officials and nobles lending their names to dubious legal claims in exchange for a portion of any proceeds. The medieval-era statutes were repealed in 1967 and, for most in the profession today, the doctrines are likely a long-ago law school memory.
However, the concepts are being addressed again in courts in Canada in the 21st century, in connection with third-party funding agreements for litigation.
Published in Features
Don’t blame crown attorneys for court delaysThe central thrust of Michael Spratt’s latest article is that the solution to Ontario’s overburdened criminal justice system is for the political wing of government to “reign in” what the author says are complacent, possessive and overzealous prosecutors.
Published in Web exclusive content
Monday, 03 October 2016 09:00

Demand for cyber-insurance on the upswing

Demand for cyber-insurance on the upswingAwareness about cyberbreaches has reached the mainstream, but the law is still nascent
Published in Features
Enforcement officers: kids judging credibilityGet ready for this: Enforcement officers can, nay must, conduct an interview of a deportee who has alleged risk, if the credibility of the risk allegation is at issue. So says the Federal Court of Appeal in its recent pronouncement in Atawnah v. MPSEP.
Published in Web exclusive content
Monday, 18 July 2016 09:57

Is today yesterday?

Is today yesterday?Four-year-olds have an amazing ability to ask very confusing questions, including my son’s “Is today yesterday?” I found myself asking a similar question when considering some recent cases regarding the summary judgment/trial process in Newfoundland and Labrador.
Published in Web exclusive content
Directors’ liability for statutory breaches: lifting the corporate veilCanadian law has always recognized the separate identity between a corporation and its directors. Only in very limited circumstances will a court pierce the corporate veil to hold a director personally liable for corporate wrongs. For example, a director may be responsible for individual tortious conduct that causes the plaintiff injury.
Published in Latest News
Monday, 04 July 2016 09:00

Provincial court snakes & ladders

Provincial court snakes & laddersThe two most high-profile criminal trials in Canada in the past year were ones that took place in provincial court. The prosecutions of Senator Mike Duffy and former CBC radio host Jian Ghomeshi were the source of voluminous media coverage — by national media outlets, on social media, and the subject of endless commentary by columnists, pundits, and academics. As well, the courtroom actions and eventual rulings by justices Charles Vaillancourt and William Horkins were subject to intense scrutiny.
The state of litigation privilege after BlankTen years ago, the Supreme Court of Canada rendered its decision in Blank v. Canada, thereby putting an end to considerable debate among Canadian jurists regarding the scope of the litigation privilege. In that decision, the Court underlined the distinct nature of this common law privilege, which had often been wrongly confused with solicitor-client privilege.
Published in Issue Archive
‘The bigger issue is what is the reasonable standard of conduct a proponent should expect from a Crown decision-maker, period,’ says Thomas Isaac.
‘The bigger issue is what is the reasonable standard of conduct a proponent should expect from a Crown decision-maker, period,’ says Thomas Isaac.
An Ontario Superior Court judge has dismissed a $110-million claim launched by a junior mining exploration company against the province of Ontario for breach of duty of care on the duty to consult, but the inherent question in the case will likely rise again, say experts.
Published in Latest News
Monday, 21 March 2016 09:00

A tale of two standards

A tale of two standardsI’ll start this column by telling you about what has been referred to as “one of NL’s biggest fraud scandals.” The period of 1999 to 2004 represented both the best of times and the worst of times for local Newfoundland and Labrador real estate development company Myles-Legér Ltd., co-owned by brothers William and Randell Clarke.
Published in Web exclusive content
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next > End >>
Page 1 of 22

Latest Videos

More Canadian Lawyer TV...

Digital Editions