Too much reading? We’ve got you. Check out our new Legal Audio Generator on our website.
Too much reading? We’ve got you. Check out our new Legal Audio Generator on our website. Charter Remedies: “Reading Down” GatheringLimits
Too much reading? We’ve got you. Check out our new Legal Audio Generator on our website. A significant case on privative clauses from the ABCA.
Too much reading? We’ve got you. Check out our new Legal Audio Generator on our website. Constitutional law — Interjurisdictional immunity — Aeronautics(00:00:30) Summary(00:00:32) Facts and Procedural History(00:03:17) Held: The appeals should be allowed(00:08:21) Reasons for Judgment: The Court(00:10:14) I. Background – 3(00:10:16) A. Opsis Case – 3(00:11:51) B. QMS Case – 5(00:13:35) II. Judicial History – 7(00:13:38) A. Opsis Case – 7(00:13:40) (1) Court of Québec, 2018 QCCQ 9803 – 7(00:14:27) (2) Quebec Superior Court, 2020 QCCS 4772 – 8(00:15:28) (3) Quebec Court of Appeal, 2023 QCCA 506 – 9(00:15:31) (a) Majority Reasons – 9(00:16:59) (b) Dissenting Reasons – 12(00:18:50) B. QMS Case – 15(00:18:52) (1) Court of Québec, 2019 QCCQ 5447 – 15(00:19:52) (2) Quebec Superior Court, 2020 QCCS 3952 – 16(00:20:39) (3) Quebec Court of Appeal, 2023 QCCA 325 – 17(00:20:41) (a) Majority Reasons – 17(00:21:19) (b) Dissenting Reasons – 18(00:22:27) III. Overview of the PSA and the Regulations Thereunder – 19(00:27:47) IV. Issues – 27(00:28:38) V. Do the PSA and the Regulations Thereunder Apply to the Appellants’ Activities? – 29(00:31:13) VI. Should the PSA Be Declared Constitutionally Inapplicable to the Appellants Pursuant to the Doctrine of Interjurisdictional Immunity? – 32(00:31:22) A. General Principles – 32(00:33:00) (1) First Condition: Intrusion on the Core of an Exclusive Head of Power – 37(00:34:49) (2) Second Condition: Impairment of the Core of the Exclusive Head of Power – 40(00:44:08) B. Application to the Facts – 51(00:44:11) (1) Preliminary Remarks – 51(00:46:51) (2) First Condition – 54(00:46:54) (a) Opsis Case – 54(00:49:25) (b) QMS Case – 59(00:52:00) (3) Second Condition – 62(00:52:03) (a) Methodological Clarifications – 62(00:52:58) (b) Impugned Aspects of the PSA and the Regulations Thereunder – 64(00:53:36) (i) Requirements for Obtaining an Agency Licence – 65(00:57:19) (ii) Requirements for Obtaining an Agent Licence – 69(00:58:25) (iii) Requirements Relating to Standards of Conduct – 71(01:02:28) (iv) Power of the Bureau To Issue Directives Regarding an Agency Licence Holder’s Activities – 76(01:04:45) (4) Scope of the Declaration of Inapplicability – 80(01:07:33) VII. Conclusion – 85
Too much reading? We’ve got you. Check out our new Legal Audio Generator on our website. Constitutional law — Interjurisdictional immunity — Aeronautics
Too much reading? We’ve got you. Check out our new Legal Audio Generator on our website. Criminal law — Sentencing — Considerations(00:00:12) Summary(00:00:13) Facts and Procedural History(00:03:28) Held(00:08:52) Reasons for Judgment: Rowe J. (Wagner C.J. and Karakatsanis, Côté, Martin, Kasirer, Jamal, O’Bonsawin and Moreau JJ. concurring)(00:08:57) I. Overview – 1(00:10:33) II. Factual Background – 4(00:10:55) A. The Offences – 5(00:12:26) B. Pre-Sentencing Procedural History – 10(00:15:02) C. Background of the Offender – 18(00:16:41) III. Proceedings Below – 22(00:16:43) A. Reasons for Sentence, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, 2022 ONSC 2274 (Aitken J.) – 22(00:21:43) B. Ontario Court of Appeal, 2023 ONCA 552 (Hourigan, Brown and Monahan JJ.A.) – 32(00:23:04) IV. Issues – 35(00:23:36) V. Analysis – 36(00:24:26) A. The Sentencing Regime – 38(00:24:45) (1) Section 718: The Purpose and Objectives of Sentencing – 39(00:25:44) (2) Proportionality and Secondary Sentencing Principles – 41(00:29:02) B. Standard of Review – 47(00:33:19) C. Did the Sentencing Judge Err in Principle? – 53(00:33:29) (1) Consideration of Treatment and Programming – 54(00:39:40) (2) Application – 64(00:46:11) D. Assessment of Enhanced Credit – 77(00:46:22) (1) The Development of Enhanced Credit – 78(00:51:53) (2) Whether Delay Caused by the Offender Constitutes “Wrongful Conduct” – 87(00:59:37) (3) The Standard of Review – 100(01:01:32) (4) Application – 106(01:04:27) VI. Conclusion – 112
Too much reading? We’ve got you. Check out our new Legal Audio Generator on our website. Criminal law — Sentencing — Considerations
Too much reading? We’ve got you. Check out our new Legal Audio Generator on our website. Constitutional Law: Interprovincial Railways; Provincial Regulation
Too much reading? We’ve got you. Check out our new Legal Audio Generator on our website.
Too much reading? We’ve got you. Check out our new Legal Audio Generator on our website. Elections Law: Stays Pending Appeal
Too much reading? We’ve got you. Check out our new Legal Audio Generator on our website. (00:00:28) Mercer v Yukon (Government of), 2025 YKCA 5 (June 16, 2025)(00:05:21) Clearview AI Inc v Alberta (Information and Privacy Commissioner), 2025 ABKB 287 (May 8, 2025)
Too much reading? We’ve got you. Check out our new Legal Audio Generator on our website. Appeals: Discretionary Jurisdiction to Consider Novel Issues on Appeal/J.R.
Too much reading? We’ve got you. Check out our new Legal Audio Generator on our website. (00:00:31) R.R. v Vancouver Aboriginal Child and Family Services Society, 2025 BCCA 151 (May 8, 2025)(00:03:38) Copyright Collective of Canada v Bell Canada, 2025 FCA 92 (May 8, 2025)(00:06:09) Smajlaj v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2025 FC 821 (May 6, 2025)
Too much reading? We’ve got you. Check out our new Legal Audio Generator on our website. Administrative Law: Police; CivilianInvestigators
Too much reading? We’ve got you. Check out our new Legal Audio Generator on our website. (00:00:36) Meneen v Tallcree First Nation, 2025 FC 791 (May 1, 2025)(00:03:49) Sharma v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2025 FC 796 (May 1, 2025)
Too much reading? We’ve got you. Check out our new Legal Audio Generator on our website. Stay Pending Appeal to the SCC: Municipal Law;Road Upgrades
Too much reading? We’ve got you. Check out our new Legal Audio Generator on our website. Pay attention to this statutory interpretation case...(00:00:40) Telus Communications Inc. v Federation of Canadian Municipalities, 2025 SCC 15 (April 25, 2025)(00:10:25) Saint Mary’s University v Nova Scotia Human Rights Commission, 2025 NSSC 107 (April 17, 2025)
Too much reading? We’ve got you. Check out our new Legal Audio Generator on our website. Communications law — Telecommunications — Access to transmission lines on public property(00:00:32) Summary(00:03:37) Held (Côté and Martin JJ. dissenting)(00:03:42) Per Wagner C.J. and Karakatsanis, Rowe, Kasirer, Jamal, O’Bonsawin and Moreau JJ.(00:11:08) Per Côté and Martin JJ. (dissenting)(00:18:47) Reasons for Judgment: Moreau J. (Wagner C.J. and Karakatsanis, Rowe, Kasirer, Jamal and O’Bonsawin JJ. concurring)(00:18:58) I. Overview – 1(00:22:23) II. Background – 6(00:22:25) A. The Technology – 6(00:24:31) B. The Relevant Statutory Scheme – 9(00:29:34) C. Procedural History – 15(00:29:36) (1) CRTC Consultation and Decision – 15(00:32:43) (2) Federal Court of Appeal, 2023 FCA 79, 16 Admin. L.R. (7th) 32 (de Montigny, Locke and LeBlanc JJ.A.) – 20(00:34:41) III. Issue – 24(00:34:56) IV. Standard of Review – 25(00:35:29) V. Positions of the Parties – 26(00:38:09) VI. Analysis – 30(00:38:12) A. Principles of Statutory Interpretation – 30(00:42:02) B. The Proper Interpretation of “Transmission Line” – 38(00:42:22) (1) The Ordinary Meaning of “Transmission Line” – 39(00:47:25) (2) The Access Regime – 48(00:50:12) (3) The Broader Context – 53(01:01:27) (4) The Purposes of the Act – 68(01:06:59) (5) Absurd Consequences – 75(01:10:35) (6) Federalism Concerns – 81(01:12:45) (7) Legislative Review Panels – 84(01:14:08) VII. Conclusion – 86(01:14:47) Dissenting Reasons: Côté J. (Martin J. concurring)(01:14:54) I. Overview – 88(01:19:36) II. Background – 94(01:22:02) III. Relevant Statutory Scheme – 99(01:28:21) IV. Analysis – 104(01:30:57) A. Grammatical and Ordinary Meaning of the Words “Transmission Line” – 108(01:31:21) (1) An Interpretation Requiring a Physical Connection Line May Include 5G Small Cells – 109(01:36:57) (2) The Grammatical and Ordinary Meaning Supports a Broader Interpretation of “Transmission Line” – 117(01:40:19) B. Context of the Provision – 126(01:40:41) (1) External Context: Interplay Between the Two Statutes – 127(01:52:05) (2) Internal Context of the Telecommunications Act – 142(02:00:27) C. Object and Purpose of the Telecommunications Act – 155(02:09:42) V. Conclusion – 171
Too much reading? We’ve got you. Check out our new Legal Audio Generator on our website. Communications law — Telecommunications — Access to transmission lines on public property
Too much reading? We’ve got you. Check out our new Legal Audio Generator on our website. Appellate Practice: Incidental & Ancillary Orders