Your firm must have an account to access this feature
The federal government’s new national artificial intelligence (AI) strategy indicates that legislative and regulatory changes are coming to facilitate Canada’s transformation into an AI leader among mid-sized nations, while also protecting the privacy and security of Canadians and businesses, as well as the country’s sovereignty.
For years, the unspoken expectation in many organizations was that in-house lawyers would advise on legal matters and leave business decisions to others. That expectation has shifted, and recent data now confirms how far.
Ottawa says it will extend for a year its steel tariff-rate quotas (TRQ) regime for imports from non-CUSMA partners and the existing horizontal tariff relief for eligible U.S. steel and aluminum products, and additionally, for eligible steel products subject to derivative tariffs.
The maxim delegatus non potest delegare (“a delegate cannot delegate”) will play an ever more significant role in reviewing administrative law decisions made by AI.
Ontario’s top court has turned back an attempt by an Ontario man to get a defamation case against him dismissed as a strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP), with a lawyer saying the court’s findings outline an approach that may lead to fewer appeals of anti-SLAPP decisions.
The issuance of USCIS Policy Memorandum PM-602-0199 has generated significant concern among foreign nationals living and working in the United States on temporary visas, particularly Canadian professionals employed in the U.S. The memorandum has also raised questions among Canadian citizens sponsored for permanent residence through marriage or close family relationships with U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents. Much of the concern centres on whether the memorandum signals a shift away from adjustment of status inside the United States and toward mandatory immigrant visa processing through U.S. consulates abroad.
The Canadian General Counsel Awards (CGCA) recognized leading in-house counsel at its annual ceremony on May 28 in Toronto.
The inadvertent disclosure of a privilege document by one side to another during litigation has been likened by one motion judge to the transmission of an infection: “[T]he more quickly it is contained, the easier it may be to eradicate its harmful effect” (White v. 123627 Canada Inc. (c.o.b. Algonquin Petro Canada), 2014 ONSC 2682).
The authority of a court is commonly associated with its majority decision. It is the majority judgment that resolves disputes, establishes binding precedent and shapes the law of the day. Yet history repeatedly demonstrates that some of the most influential judicial opinions were not written by those who prevailed, but by those who stood alone. The dissenting judgment occupies a unique place within the common law tradition. It is the conscience of the court, the safeguard against intellectual complacency and often the blueprint for future legal reform.
The Federal Court has dismissed a motion by JTI-Macdonald Corp. to compel the disclosure of additional records in its challenge to the federal tobacco cost-recovery regime, reaffirming that Rule 317 of the Federal Courts Rules is not a discovery mechanism.
Law360 Canada takes your privacy seriously. Please see our Privacy Policy.