Welcome to the rights and freedoms monitoring blog!
Bienvenue au blog de la veille sur les droits et libertés!
|
Posted by Dimitri Thalakada, University of New Brunswick Faculty of Law, March 10th, 2010
The decision by the New Brunswick government to eliminate the Small Claims Court has been met with criticism within the province’s legal community. Court of Queen’s Bench Chief Justice David Smith, in an interview with the Telegraph-Journal on Tuesday, stated that: “The fact that it is now being abolished is a regressive move by the government and is counter to what is happening across the country in every other province.”
The Small Claims Court was established in 1999 in order to address a back log of over 1, 400 unassigned cases before the Court of Queen’s Bench.Cases are decided by an adjudicator and individuals are self-represented. The decision to eliminate the Small Claims Court was made as part of the 2008-2009 budget. The approximate 2, 000 cases before the Small Claims Court will be transferred to the Court of Queen’s Bench. The transfer will, according to all account, create a backlog for that court.
Chief Justice Smith is not the first to voice concern over how the transfer of cases will impact the efficiency of the Court of Queen’s Bench. Edward Keyes, President of the New Brunswick Branch of the Canadian Bar Association (CBA-NB), in a News Release on March 16, 2009: “This is step backwards, one which we believe will have serious ramifications on access to justice in this province.”
In addition to adversely affecting the efficiency of the Court of Queen’s Bench, the elimination of Small Claims Court will also have an adverse economic impact. Brian Maude, a small claims adjudicator stated in an interview with the Daily Gleaner that the small-claims system, which presently brings in $65,000 in yearly revenue through filing fees, is turning a profit. The CBA-NB adds that “Any financial savings will be more than offset by the significant delays that will arise not only in small claims matters, but in all civil cases before the Court of Queen’s Bench”.
Sources:
Adam Huras, “Courts move ‘regressive’”, Telegraph Journal , March 10, 2010 http://telegraphjournal.canadaeast.com/front/article/978954
Don McPherson, ”N.B. small-claim court system works, say lawyers”, Daily Gleaner, March 10, 2010 http://dailygleaner.canadaeast.com/front/article/979132
CBA-NB, “CBA-NB opposes elimination of Small Claims Court”, Press Release (for immediate release March 16, 2009) http://www.cba.org/NB/pdf/New%20Release%20March%202009.pdf
Posted by Thomas Raffy, Université de Moncton faculté de droit, March 9th, 2010
Une première au Nouveau-Brunswick; cependant la nouvelle comporte un bémol. Lisez plus/Read more…
Posted by Christina Achkarian, University of Western Ontario Faculty of Law, March 9th, 2010
The municipality of Petrolia has banned a citizen from its public facilities after he posted YouTube videos critizing structural issues with the town’s community centre. The wall of the community centre has cracked, and pieces have fallen off.
The official reason for the ban is said to be because the citizen brought a camera into the community centre, a violation of their rules. Reporters from the Sarnia Observer were also told they were unable to photograph a damaged area of the community centre’s wall.
In my opinion, a ban on municipal public facilities is quite harsh for violating a rule against video. Granted, the municipality stated that the rule is in place to protect privacy and the safety of children, but the punishment seems rather excessive. It is possible that the municipality is attempting to punish him for his criticism, more than a violation of the rules.
In a statement to the Sarnia Observer, the banned citizen said, “I live in a Gestapo state. I’m no longer allowed to question my government.”
Source: The London Free Press
Posted by Suzanne Grant, University of Victoria Faculty of Law, March 8th, 2010
It has been just over six months since the Honourable Thomas R. Braidwood QC released the first phase of his report making recommendations to the B.C. provincial government on the appropriate use of restricted energy weapons by governmental agencies. Last week, Metro Vancouver Transit Police released videos of nine incidents in which they had deployed the weapons, in response, reports the CBC , to a freedom of information request made by them. Lisez plus/Read more…
Posted by Jaclyn Hesje, University of Saskatchewan Faculty of Law, March 7th, 2010
Saskatchewan’s Privacy Commissioner has expressed concern about the security of health records after a doctor retires or dies. Lisez plus/Read more…
Posted by Tania Walker, Université du Quebec à Montréal faculté de droit, March 6th, 2010
Le Conseil Supérieur de la langue française (CSLF) a recommandé que les écoles privées non subventionnées doivent appliquer la loi 101 sans exceptions. Cette recommandation fait suit au jugement de la Cour Suprême qui avait décidé que la loi 104 était invalide et inconstitutionnelle. A cette époque, des parents allophones ou francophones envoyaient leurs enfants à des écoles privées non subventionnées pour contourner la loi 101 et avoir ensuite le droit d’accéder au système anglophone subventionné. Le président du Conseil juge qu’il est inacceptable d’acheter un droit à l’enseignement en anglais et ainsi avoir deux classes d’immigrants. Il ajoute que tous ceux qui font le choix de venir au Québec sont obligés de fréquenter les écoles en français.
-Le Devoir
Que pensez-vous ?
Posted by Kyle Gossen, Queen's University Faculty of Law, March 6th, 2010
The Conservative government has asked former Supreme Court Justice Frank Iacobucci to examine the documents containing information on what Canadian authorities knew about the torture of Afghan prisoners. Justice Iacobucci will review the documents and determine whether the proposed redactions are justified in light of national security concerns.
Professor Stuart Hendin of the University of Ottawa pointed out that whether the truth comes out will depend which documents Iacobucci is given and whether his decisions will be final or subject to the government scrutiny.
Posted by Suzanne Grant, University of Victoria Faculty of Law, March 5th, 2010
Update:
A statement of claim has been filed in which the plaintiff alleges that the investigators breached their duty and conducted a negligent investigation by failing arrest and take evidence from the officers involved in the assault. The plaintiff has rejected suggestions to take his complaint to the Office of the Police Complaints Commissioner, and his lawyer has been quoted as stating that the office is staffed by former officers who would have trouble finding fault with their old colleagues. Lisez plus/Read more…
Posted by Pascal Mayer, McGill University Faculty of Law, March 5th, 2010
A woman has recently filed a human rights complaint against the Quebec government for an ultimatum it gave an Egyptian-born woman taking French classes at a local Cegep: take off the niqab or drop the class.
La Presse reports that the college was initially accommodating, allowing the woman to present with her back to the class and providing a seating arrangement in which men would not face her directly. However, the woman refused repeat requests by instructors that she remove her veil in order to correct her enunciation and facial expression. Ultimately, the director of francization with the Quebec Department of Immigration formally expelled the woman as a result of her failure to remove her veil and informed her that she could continue taking the class online.
The Quebec government has publicly supported the school’s decision to expel the student; however, it has also undertaken to “clarify” its position on the niqab in educational institutions.
The debate has re-initiated a nationwide debate over the “reasonable accommodation” issue.
See below for coverage and opinion pieces from across the country:
Edmonton Sun
National Post
Montreal Gazette
The Suburban (Montreal Weekly English Newspaper)
Television coverage of the issue
Posted by Eugenie Lefebvre, Université de Montréal faculté de droit, March 4th, 2010
Le 25 février, la Cour d’appel du Québec a rejeté la requête en permission d’aller en appel dont elle avait été saisie le mois dernier, relativement à l’affaire concernant les cours d’éthique et culture religieuse (ERC). Le plus haut tribunal de la province a refusé d’entendre les parents dénoncant le caractère obligatoire du cours ERC, déclinant de la sorte toute demande d’exemption. Cette décision confirme le jugement de la Cour supérieure rendu en septembre dernier, à l’effet que le cours ERC ne brime pas la liberté de conscience et de religion. En outre, la Cour d’appel a conclu que le débat était devenu théorique, compte tenu que les enfants visés dans ce recours ne fréquentent plus un établissement de la commission scolaire en litige, la Commission scolaire des Chênes. Tel que le déclare le juge Yves-Marie Morissette, « la position des appelants dans le débat théorique qu’ils voudraient faire en appel est vouée à l’échec ».
|
Inscrivez-vous - courriel quotidien ou mensuel ebulletin de ACLC
Recent posts, articles récents
|
Recent comments, commentaires récents