Access to Justice

  • March 25, 2026

    Words matter when writing legal AI prompts

    When writing AI prompts, lawyers shape perception and outcomes, so understanding the impact of words in AI prompts is crucial. Since language acts as a filter, the specific words and phrases used in a prompt influence the AI’s interpretation of legal concepts, potentially affecting recommendations or decisions. If terms are ambiguous or carry historical biases, the legal AI response can lead to unintended interpretations. Tailoring prompts to set the stage and include sufficient background information allows the legal AI to understand the user’s intent. With prompts that are clear and unambiguous, legal professionals can reduce the likelihood of misinterpretation in the legal AI output.

  • March 25, 2026

    Ontario Court of Appeal examines obligations of trial judge for self-represented accused

    What assistance should a self-represented accused expect from the presiding judge during a trial? That question was recently addressed in an appeal before the Ontario Court of Appeal.

  • March 25, 2026

    Parole hearings: A response to Dorson article

    It was with great interest that I started reading the article written by David Dorson in Law360 Canada on March 19.

  • March 24, 2026

    Dalhousie U and King’s College to resurrect joint journalism-law program

    Two universities in Nova Scotia are re-launching a joint degree program combining law and journalism in a bid to create professionals able to “cut through the noise” of today’s world.

  • March 23, 2026

    Manitoba Court of Appeal determines frustration and fear, not drugs, led to murder

    Jon Preston Hastings was convicted of first-degree murder in a King’s Bench judge-alone trial (R. v. Hastings, 2024 MBKB 171). Although conceding that the evidence established an intent to commit murder, Hastings argued that the trial judge erred in finding planning and deliberation, which are essential elements for a first-degree murder conviction. The Manitoba Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal (R. v. Hastings, 2026 MBCA 11).

  • March 23, 2026

    Class conflicts in corporate COVID-19 claims: Alberta court weighs limits of one class

    Class actions promote litigation efficiency and access to justice, but they can also expose tensions between groups of plaintiffs whose interests do not fully align. In Ingram v. Alberta, 2025 ABKB 420, (Ingram) the Alberta Court of King’s Bench (the court) showed how those tensions can become a certification issue when a proposed class definition sweeps together businesses with potentially opposite economic interests.

  • March 23, 2026

    N.B. moves to end limitation period for victims of intimate partner violence dependent on assailant

    New Brunswick is proposing legislation that would remove the limitation period for civil claims by victims of intimate partner violence who were dependent on their assailant. A March 18 news release notes there is no civil limitation period to file claims for damages in cases of assault or battery “for acts of a sexual nature” or for “trespass to the person.”

  • March 23, 2026

    Seismic Bill 21 case draws record counsel & intervener presence at this week’s four-day SCC hearing

    This week’s blockbuster Bill 21 appeal at the Supreme Court involves 140 counsel of record — with 64 of them slated to make oral argument over four days on behalf of the 10 main party groups and the record 51 interveners.

  • March 20, 2026

    B.C. boosts compensation for intimate-image abuse victims

    British Columbia is increasing compensation limits for people who have had their intimate images shared without their consent. Victims can now seek as much as $75,000 in compensation through the Civil Resolution Tribunal (CRT) with amendments to the Intimate Images Protection Act now in effect.

  • March 20, 2026

    Why Ontario is the epicentre of Canada’s remand issue

    A recent CBC report noted that Ontario has announced plans for a new jail in Brockville and to add 1,436 new correctional beds by 2032. By any reasonable measure, Ontario should not be facing a jail overcrowding crisis. Crime rates are not surging out of control. Sentencing laws have not dramatically stiffened. Yet the province’s correctional facilities are often beyond safe capacity. The explanation lies not in who is being sentenced but in who is waiting.