Your search

"This title addresses civil procedure in Ontario, from preliminary considerations to appeals of motions, applications and actions. It provides readers with knowledge of the litigation process in the Superior Court of Justice and the Court of Appeal for Ontario."-- Provided by publisher.

How intimate partner violence (IPV) is conceptualized affects what we see when we look at situations involving IPV and what we think the solutions to the problem of IPV are—either in individual cases or in the development of broader legal and policy responses. In this article, it is suggested that while conceptualizing IPV as coercive control is an improvement over previous understandings, it does not go far enough. Coercive control must be located within a broader conceptualization of IPV as a form of social and systemic entrapment if it is not to operate in a harmful manner for victim-survivors.

Disclaimer: This summary was generated by AI based on the content of the source document.

This article criticises the government's rejection of proposals by the Prison Reform Trust that would have extended self-defence in householder cases to victims/survivors of domestic abuse. The authors argue that the Prison Reform Trust proposals should be enacted, and further supported by novel complementary reform of the option to retreat, and the exclusion of intoxicated mistaken belief in self-defence claims. Specifically, the authors advance a statutory rebuttable presumption regarding the option to retreat in cases involving domestic abuse, namely, an assumption that the victim/survivor was not realistically able to retreat safely, unless it is proven otherwise. The authors also examine the appropriateness of the policy decision to exclude intoxicated mistaken belief in all self-defence cases and advocate for its removal. It should be replaced with a requirement that all mistaken beliefs must be reasonable regardless of the presence of intoxication. Procedural recommendations are also advanced, including amendment of the Crown Court Compendium to include judicial directions on self-defence which adopt a social entrapment approach in domestic abuse cases, and supported by the admissibility of non-medical expert evidence on the nature and impact of coercive control.

Intimate partner violence [IPV] causes myriad and gendered harms, but Canadian law has inconsistently provided avenues of economic redress. Although tort law has evolved to allow IPV survivors to seek compensation, tort-based remedies are sought rarely and largely limited to intentional torts such as assault, battery, and the intentional infliction of emotional distress. These torts do not always encompass the harms sustained by IPV survivors, particularly those caused by economic abuse and coercive control. In Ahluwalia v Ahluwalia, a 2022 family law case, Justice Renu Mandhane responded to this gap in the law by recognizing a new tort of family violence, but her decision was overturned by the Ontario Court of Appeal in 2023, and the case is now before the Supreme Court of Canada. Our paper provides a feminist analysis of the role of tort law in providing compensatory remedies for survivors of IPV. We situate tort remedies and Ahluwalia within the wider context of Canadian laws addressing IPV and feminist critiques of tort law and theory. This wider context raises issues about access to justice and socio-economic responses to IPV for members of marginalized groups in particular. We also examine how myths and stereotypes have influenced this area of law and the role of lawyers and judges in this respect, including in Ahluwalia. We conclude that recognition of the tort of family violence is an important but limited step forward in compensating the harms of IPV, and we urge governments to do more to systemically remediate these harms.

Human rights movements and organizations all over the world cite the pursuit and preservation of dignity as one of their goals, but the legal implications of this term are highly contested. In Dignity and Judicial Authority, Rachel Bayefsky offers a theory of dignity that emphasizes respect for status, non-domination, and control over self-presentation to others. The book explains how US courts can recognize the loss of dignity as a legally actionable harm and provide remedies for this harm. In applying these ideas, the book explores a host of corresponding legal topics, including constitutional standing doctrine, the "dignitary torts," and court-mandated apologies. It demonstrates the connections between dignity and subjects such as jurisdiction and remedies, which help to delineate the bounds of judicial authority.

"Police enforce the law, but they must also obey it. Statutes circumscribe how law enforcement officers conduct their work. At the same time, Canadian courts have handed police many powers to stop, search, and otherwise investigate people in the pursuit of public safety and crime prevention. Ancillary Police Powers in Canada explains what these common-law police powers are, how they came to be, and, crucially, what the potential dangers are in their expanding scope. Why are Mr. Big sting operations used in this country? What is the difference between police duty and lawful authority? Should the Supreme Court rescind powers when the police tactics they enable become controversial? This nuanced book surveys the evolution, application, and future of judge-made police powers. The authors, experts in their fields, bring historical perspective, critical legal theory, and empirical analysis to an issue that is fundamental to constitutional protection from state interference with individual liberty."-- Provided by publisher.

Disclaimer: This summary was generated by AI based on the content of the source document.

"This title is the fourth edition of our flagship professional immigration title, originally adapted from Lynn Fournier-Ruggles’ Canadian Immigration and Refugee Law for Legal Professionals, 3rd Edition. Aimed at young lawyers and consultants, it offers a broad and practical treatment of Canadian immigration, refugee, and citizenship law."-- Provided by publisher.

Internment is the forcible confinement or detention of a person during wartime. Large-scale internment operations were carried out by the Canadian government du...

Purposive interpretation leads a double life. As a matter of constitutional practice, it forms the doctrine through which courts in Canada and around the world determine the concrete protections that abstract constitutional rights afford. However, as a matter of constitutional theory, purposive interpretation is routinely rejected as either an empty phrase that offers no alternative to established theories of constitutional interpretation or a dangerous doctrine that provides no basis for distinguishing between justified and unjustified interpretations of constitutional rights. This essay formulates a conception of purposive interpretation that is not vulnerable to these objections. The purposive approach to the interpretation of constitutional rights follows from a set of ideas about how legal interpretation differs from interpretation more broadly, how constitutional interpretation differs from interpretation in other legal domains, and how constitutional interpretation constrains both the purposes it attributes to particular provisions and the application of those purposes to particular contexts. My aim is to show that these ideas fit together in a coherent doctrinal whole that is neither empty nor dangerous. Purposive interpretation is not empty because it offers a genuine alternative to the presuppositions and structure of opposing interpretive paradigms. Purposive interpretation is not dangerous because it provides a principled set of resources for distinguishing between justified and unjustified interpretations.

"This book helps legislative drafters and private sector lawyers write concise and precise documents by arming them with: Practical advice - a step-by-step approach; Expert advice - over 750 examples are employed to help illustrate how provisions evolve through the application of various drafting techniques; Best practices - helps drafters deal with other key parties in the process and increase their efficiency; Invaluable tools - allow drafters to choose the right words in the appropriate context to convey the document's intended meaning."-- Provided by publisher.

Disclaimer: This summary was generated by AI based on the content of the source document.