{"id":3121,"date":"2019-03-21T12:10:51","date_gmt":"2019-03-21T12:10:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.ruleoflaw.ca\/?p=3121"},"modified":"2019-03-21T15:10:01","modified_gmt":"2019-03-21T15:10:01","slug":"arl-files-factum-in-stillman-appeal","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.ruleoflaw.ca\/arl-files-factum-in-stillman-appeal\/","title":{"rendered":"ARL Files Factum in Stillman Appeal"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>On March 8, 2019, ARL filed its factum at the Supreme Court of Canada in <em>Stillman v. The Queen<\/em> and <em>R. v. Beaudry<\/em>. We have <a href=\"https:\/\/www.ruleoflaw.ca\/military-justice-and-stare-decisis-arl-returns-to-the-scc\/\">previously written<\/a> about how these military justice appeals offer the Court a rare opportunity to provide guidance on the doctrine of horizontal <em>stare decisis<\/em>. ARL\u2019s factum proposes a framework that we hope will assist the Court in clarifying the law for intermediate appellate courts \u2014 and lawyers, and litigants \u2014 across the country.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>You can read ARL\u2019s factum <a href=\"https:\/\/www.ruleoflaw.ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/03\/ARL-Intervenor-Factum-Stillman-and-Beaudry-v-HMQ.pdf\">here<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Our next step is to appear before the Court at the hearing of the appeals, on March 26, 2019. If you have thoughts on our submissions, please let us know! We would be grateful for input from the ARL community as we prepare.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><em>Adam Goldenberg and Peter Grbac are litigators at McCarthy T\u00e9trault LLP. They are representing ARL in these appeals.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>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\u2019s factum proposes a framework that &#8230;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":5870,"featured_media":3123,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_exactmetrics_skip_tracking":false,"_exactmetrics_sitenote_active":false,"_exactmetrics_sitenote_note":"","_exactmetrics_sitenote_category":0,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[77,34],"tags":[400,396,71,64],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ruleoflaw.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3121"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ruleoflaw.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ruleoflaw.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ruleoflaw.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/5870"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ruleoflaw.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3121"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.ruleoflaw.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3121\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3126,"href":"https:\/\/www.ruleoflaw.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3121\/revisions\/3126"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ruleoflaw.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/3123"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ruleoflaw.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3121"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ruleoflaw.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3121"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ruleoflaw.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3121"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}