By Cassandra Paterson, Student at the Faculty of Law, University of Alberta In three recent decisions, the Alberta Court of Appeal (the “ABCA”) paid close attention to the defendants’ behaviour when deciding whether to dismiss a claim or action for delay under Rules 4.31 and 4.33 of the Alberta Rules of Court. Rules 4.31 and […]
By: Dr. Gerard Kennedy In a recent article to be published in the Canadian Bar Review, I analyzed whether procedure in the Federal Court and Federal Court of Appeal (the “Federal Courts”) is more efficient than in many large superior courts and thus is better suited to facilitating access to justice. Through a combination of
The Federal Courts Advantage in Civil Procedure Read More »
le 29 novembre | midi à 14h00 | en présentiel Lorsqu’un(e) client(e) souhaite accéder aux tribunaux manitobains en français pour régler une affaire civile, cela donne à leur avocat(e) une opportunité importante de soutenir l’exercice de ce droit linguistique. Cela soulève également de nombreuses questions sur la procédure à suivre pour obtenir
By Dr. Gerard Kennedy & Tasha Ellis 5185603 Manitoba Ltd et al v Government of Manitoba et al, 2023 MBCA 47 Provinces can, theoretically, abolish private law causes of action. They can even pass legislation to extinguish judgments. But can they constitutionally compel dismissal of a cause of action while in progress? That was the
Can the Legislature Order Dismissal of a Case Against the Government? Read More »
By Dr. Gerard J. Kennedy Across Canada, the chief justices of the provinces have been known to take a lead on “access to justice”. This is often, but by no means exclusively, done through emphasizing how to apply and potentially reform civil procedure. In my forthcoming Manitoba Law Journal article, I analyze the legacy of
Chief Justice Chartier’s Civil Procedure Legacy: Attuned to Access to Justice Read More »
National Self-Represented Litigants Project (NSRLP) is jointly hosting a free seminar this week with the Canadian Institute for the Administration of Justice (CIAJ). This online seminar runs 11am to 5pm ET on Thursday, November 16th, and is open to all members of the legal profession, and to self-represented litigants. The objective is to ensure that
“A Dialogue on Self-Representation.” Read More »
By Dr. Gerard Kennedy & Tasha Ellis In a 2023 Manitoba Court of Appeal decision,[1] Justice Mainella provided an overview of the history, purpose, and challenges involved in vexatious litigant orders. In this vein, he also considered the “co-existing” inherent and statutory[2] jurisdiction of Manitoba courts to approve, dismiss and even initiate a motion for a vexatious
