HomeARL News

ARL News

Easing the Stress on Constitutional Democracy

On October 6, 2019, I had the pleasure of speaking at a conference entitled “Constitutional Democracy Under Stress.” The conference was hosted by Section 1 and its founder, Peter Biro, who incidentally was one of my early mentors when I was a summer student. Mr. Biro, whose article for ARL on the Section 1 project can be read here, gathered ...

Read More »

ARL Celebrates Five Years and Charitable Status

Five years ago, I founded Advocates for the Rule of Law with a small group of like-minded lawyers. We were concerned with what we perceived to be a growing disregard for the rule of law, and a move toward what some – including most notably, Justice Abella of the Supreme Court of Canada – have called the “rule of justice.” ...

Read More »

The Original Meaning of Military Law

Advocates for the Rule of Law returned to the Supreme Court of Canada last month in the Stillman and Beaudry appeals to make important submissions on the topic of stare decisis. I attended with my co-counsel, Adam Goldenberg and Peter Grbac. Mr. Goldenberg’s oral submissions were stellar and the panel kept him up for an additional few minutes to ask him ...

Read More »

ARL Files Factum in Stillman Appeal

On March 8, 2019, ARL filed its factum at the Supreme Court of Canada in Stillman v. The Queen and R. v. Beaudry. We have previously written about how these military justice appeals offer the Court a rare opportunity to provide guidance on the doctrine of horizontal stare decisis. ARL’s factum proposes a framework that we hope will assist the ...

Read More »

Military Justice and Stare Decisis: ARL Returns to the SCC

For the third time in little more than a year, the Supreme Court of Canada has granted Advocates for the Rule of Law leave to intervene to assist the Court in addressing a significant public law issue. This time, ARL will make submissions on when intermediate appellate courts may depart from their own binding precedents. This question of horizontal stare ...

Read More »

ARL at the Supreme Court

Earlier this month, Advocates for the Rule of Law appeared as an intervenor in the Bell/NFL and Vavilov appeals at the Supreme Court. Prior to the hearing, the Court advised the parties that these appeals would present an opportunity to reconsider the Court’s seminal decision in Dunsmuir v. New Brunswick, released a decade ago.  Consequently, various organizations, including ARL, moved to intervene in the case. ...

Read More »

Supreme Court Rejects Duty to Consult in Legislative Process

The Supreme Court of Canada released its decision today in Mikisew Cree First Nation v. Canada (Governor General in Council). The decision significantly deals with whether there is a duty on the government to consult with Aboriginal groups prior to introducing legislation.  The Court held (7-2) that no such duty exists. However, 3 of the 7 justices were somewhat equivocal in their ...

Read More »

Discussing the Notwithstanding Clause

I had the real privilege today of appearing on Your Morning on CTV to chat about the notwithstanding clause with host Ben Mulroney. In particular, we discussed the threat of premier-designate, François Legault to invoke s.33 of the Charter preemptively in legislation that would ban public servants and officials from wearing religious symbols. The full interview can be accessed here. ...

Read More »

ARL is Heading Back to the Supreme Court

As previously reported, Advocates for the Rule of Law recently sought intervenor status in the standard of review appeals before the Supreme Court. The Court has indicated that it intends to reconsider Dunsmuir – the seminal administrative law decision in Canada. These appeals will have a significant impact on administrative law, and, potentially, on the rule of law itself. It ...

Read More »