RSS FeedMore on Legal Aid Boycott
Legal aid boycott grows over paltry paycheques
Here is our previous post on the boycott.
Major criminal law Charter cases to be released Friday: Grant, Suberu, Harrison
I have huge news for anyone interested in criminal law (and indeed, many accused persons).
After years of anticipation, the Supreme Court of Canada is finally set to release some of the most important criminal law Charter of Rights decisions since the Charter was introduced. This will have implications across Canada for thousands of criminal cases currently before the courts.
According to the latest bulletin, decisions in the following cases will be released on Friday, July 17, 2009:
- Musibau Suberu v. Her Majesty the Queen (Crim.) (Ont.) (31912)
- Donnohue Grant v. Her Majesty the Queen (Crim.) (Ont.) (31892)
- Curtis Shepherd v. Her Majesty the Queen (Crim.) (Sask.) (32037)
- Bradley Harrison v. Her Majesty the Queen (Crim.) (Ont.) (32487)
These cases promise to redefine the way that evidence is excluded from a criminal trial after a Charter breach has been found. The application of Charter, s. 24(2), and specifically the test for whether the adminstration of justice would be brought into disrepute by the admission of the evidence, is expected to be significantly different after Friday. The old test in R. v. Collins, [1987] 1 S.C.R. 265 was certainly overdue for a review after over twenty years of application and modification by trial and appellate courts.
Summaries of the four cases and the issues can be found here.
An absolute beginner’s guide to free online marketing for lawyers
Don’t you cringe when you hear marketing and lawyers in the same sentence? Didn’t you go to law school instead of an MBA program so you never had to deal with marketing or sales of some sort? That may be true, but I am afraid you’re stuck with marketing as long as you have or need clients. The good news is the Internet and social media can take both the stigma and the pain out of the process. It works, and it is often absolutely free. You just need to know some basics.
Let’s assume you’re not Edward Greenspan or Abraham Lincoln. You’re interested in reaching out to three groups: clients, potential clients and colleagues. You know how to use the Internets, and you don’t mind some publicity. Before you go any further, remember: choose strong passwords and use some password management software. That should keep you reasonably safe from identity theft. Finally, have an open mind and grow a thick skin. Some people on the Internet have a foul mouth. Beyond these simple warnings lie huge online marketing opportunities.
The power of free online marketing is in social media. Here is how it works. Social media is a way to publish messages for a circle of followers. If some of these followers have their own followers, you all form a network. When your message reaches your circle, one or more of its members can pass it on. It’s exactly how rumours spread in small towns. But social networks are bigger and faster thanks to instant and massive online communications. Some celebrities have online circles consisting of hundreds of thousands of people. Imagine the PR possibilities. And the media is social because online audiences themselves do a lot of heavy lifting in spreading the message.
That’s exactly how sites like Twitter work. You get your own page. You can post short messages on it. If you get someone to care about it, they can subscribe to your updates. You can subscribe to other people’s updates. Each subscriber can scroll through a page consisting of updates posted by his or her circle. If a message is interesting enough, it can propagate through the network reaching awfully many people. All for free. You just need to get the community to care. Facebook and LinkedIn are similar, but they used to focus on building online people networks. Now they imitate Twitter by encouraging members to post updates. Social media works because millions of people are on these sites typing away or reading every minute of every day—millions connected into a network.
Every message on the Internet that matters works like this today. Forums, blogs, good old websites, you name it. Unless the message gets into social media, it’s probably lost. I am not talking about paid advertising of course. That’s an exception, but you probably already know that money can buy you eyeballs. If you don’t want to spend a lot of money, social media can help you.
Take blogs, for example. A blog (click for an example) is just a webpage where you post articles on a regular basis. It usually looks like a sequence of postings sorted in chronological order. Often authors allow readers to post comments or questions under each posting. Twitter postings are similar to blog posts, but there are two important differences. First, your posts on Twitter must be 140 characters or less. There is usually no length limits on blogs. Second, Twitter organizes readers into a cohesive community making it easy to pass on posts (tweets) through the network. The length limit also simplifies spreading a message through the community. Shorter messages on average probably have higher chances of being read than long blog posts. Remember, the key to social media is the speed and the reach of your message.
Forums are one of the oldest methods of online discussion and content distribution. A forum (click for an example) is a webpage with a list of topics. Each topic is a link to another webpage with a list of posts on this topic. Each post is also a link leading to a page that contains responses to the post. That’s how people talked online fifteen years ago. That’s how many of us still talk today. Unless the forum is members-only, anyone can choose to check the postings. But you have to scroll through all of them to see if anything interests you. Then you can choose to respond. If you are interested in several forums, you have to check all of them regularly. There is no circle trusted to post only what interests you. You have to sift through the content yourself. But some forums are so popular that this is not an issue.
(to be continued)
Australian Securities Regulators In Policy Quandary
First posted on Commercial Law international on July 1, 2009.
The question that faces Australian securities regulators is what to do about two or more Chinese state owned enterprises together owing substantial shareholdings in an Australian company?
At first blush it would appear that this is a case of China take over fear, however there is much more to the story than this. Indeed, there is a legal/regulatory story here as well. Now I am not trying to say there is or isn’t a China phobia here, it is a given that all nations have their own xenophobic tendency, however I cannot speak on this as I know very little about Australia and what I do know comes from watching Rugby, Crocodile Dundee and Steve Irwin (may he rest in peace). Moreover, while I am not versed in Australian law, I believe that my legal training and experience thus far permits me an insightful comment or two.
This question has come to the fore because of the increased interest of Chinese companies in Australia´s mineral wealth – this is in fact a global trend and not one peculiar to Australia – just take a look at the recent attempt by Chinalco to increase its stake in Rio Tinto to see my point.
In Australia it isn’t that two or more state entities is per say barred from investing in the same company, as the law currently is, not at all. Then what is the problem, you might ask? The issues here are the concepts of associated entities and substantial shareholdings.
You see in Australia, under their securities regime, two or more entities that are associated – related in some way, namely through ownership and control – that combined own more than 5% of a listed company must declare a substantial shareholding. However, due to a lack of clarity in the law and the absence of a clear policy position the question remains open if two or more Chinese state owned companies would be considered associated and required to declare a substantial shareholding?
The securities regulators face several related sub-problems and they must approach this issue with some degree of sensitively to the political nature of dealing with entities belong to another state. With that in mind regulators have to be cognizant of the fact that they are not dealing with subsidiaries here but foreign state owed companies; state ownership is not equal in all these enterprises; state control is not equal in all these enterprises; and these enterprises while having the same state owner might indeed be fierce competitors with opposing interests.
I do not envy the regulators their task but it will be interesting to watch what if any policy position is developed or if the law is changed to address this issue.
Michael Yadegari Gets In The Mind of Israel
I’m doing a law program in Israel right now with an interesting guy – Michael Yadegari, a Persian-Jewish law student from Los Angeles who did this program last year.
He is currently a JD/MBA student at Chapman University in Orange, CA and President of the Jewish Law Students Association and founder of Chabad at Chapman.
He spent his time here putting together a documentary, In the Mind of Israel, a non-partisan compilation of first-hand accounts about why Israelis, both Jews and Arabs, live in their country.
The video presents a vast diversity of perspectives and positions, representing a diversity of opinions that we rarely see outside of Israel. He interviews ordinary Israelis, members of parliament, soldiers, law professors, and students.
There are some political implications of the film, including options towards a peace process. Those interviewed express controversial views from across the political spectrum, and helps highlights some of the enormous challenges Israel has within itself in determining what course of action to take for the future. It includes some pretty strong statements, including,
The Arabic (sic) needs to die.
Others claim that Israeli politicians use the Palestinian issue for their own ends, and are not really interested in resolving the problem at all. One Arab truck driver emphasizes that they already live together, and collective cooperation towards a solution is certainly possible.
Israel is not a monolithic country, but this film does help give a glimpse into the very complicated minds of those who live there. Perhaps even more important than an international audience seeing this would be for Israelis themselves to talk to each other and resolve their differences, educate one another about misunderstandings, and move beyond the historical obstacles that have hindered progress thus far.
You can purchase a copy of the film here.
Lawrence Lessig Remix Commentary on Copyright
Lawrence Lessig, a law professor at Stanford, recently said,
If you come to the Net armed with the idea that the old system of copyright is going to work just fine here, this more than anything is going to get you to recognize: you need some new ideas.
To illustrate this point, he uses the following remix by Ophir Kutiel of Israel, where I’m currently studying law.
Karlheinz Schreiber loses again
Ontario court rejects Schreiber’s bid to stay in Canada
(post sponsored by advicescene.com)
Political ad bans on transit are unconstitutional
Top court strikes down bus ad ban
Here is the text of the ruling.
(post sponsored by advicescene.com)
The Swiss Banking Business Model Faces Realignment
First posted on Commercial Law International on June 29, 2009.
The world economic down turn has had many knock on effects, many of which unexpected. It seems that bad times has the uncanny effect of making the once unthinkable, unsayable and undoable all very much possible.
The Swiss banking model can be best characterized with one word: Secrecy.
This don’t ask, don’t tell attitude is more than just a business model – it is enshrined in Swiss law. The high protection that client confidentiality receives in Switzerland has made it a favorable destination for the money of my high net worth individuals wishing to shield their money. Also it doesn’t hurt that it also has a very favorable tax policy as well.
This Swiss shield unfortunately is not very discriminating – it basically protects all comers. It makes no distinction between those who wish to shield their money for legitimate or illegitimate purposes. Moreover, it doesn’t even a make a distinction between rightfully and ill gotten gains. This hands off approach while very profitable has lead to some very tragic and embarrassing incidents for Switzerland. Specifically, I am mainly speaking of Nazi accounts filled with plunder during their rise and fall but generally I am also referring to Swiss banks being the preferred destination for the money of certain criminal elements and many a dictator.
Please don’t get me wrong, I am not trying to say that the Swiss actively seek out ill gotten gains – to my knowledge they do not – nor am I saying that they have done nothing to try and rectify ill gotten gains ending up in their banks, I am not trying to say that at all. Then what am I trying to say?
What I am trying to say is simply this: any system predicated on secrecy will have its limits on how well it can tackle the twin issues of legitimacy and source of funds.
However, times they are a changing.
This change is evidenced by four things. The first is a long and as yet to be resolved battle between UBS and US authorities over the names and identities of some of the banks US clients and with it opposing interpretations of the US-Swiss Tax Treaty. The second is the OECD´s tax haven black list, talk of G20 nations developing a sanctions regime aimed at tax heavens and the drive by OECD countries and in particular the US to conclude double taxation agreements. The third is the revised US-Swiss double taxation treaty. And lastly is the current economic climate.
All of this has forced the Swiss into re-think mode. As reported in the Financial Times: leading members of the Swiss Private Bankers Association have recognized they may have to raise tax compliance with clients and, if necessary encourage them to declare previously hidden assets.
Does this mean an end to secrecy as the cornerstone of the Swiss banking model?
Highly unlikely. However, it does mean a few rays of light into the otherwise dark room of secrecy called the Swiss banking model.
Racism not an issue in Courtenay, mayor says
(post sponsored by advicescene.com)
B.C. government announces access-to-justice reforms
B.C. civil, family courts reformed
(post sponsored by advicescene.com)
Murder in German court
This woman is dead, and her husband is in critical condition in a hospital. A man accused of screaming “terrorist” and “Islamist whore” at her on a children’s playground, stabbed the woman, who was pregnant, 18 times during his own trial. When her husband ran to protect her, a police officer shot him.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jul/07/german-trial-hijab-murder-egypt
Awards
Partners
sLaw- The Court
- British Columbia (Ministry of Education) v. Moore: Comparing Approaches to Comparator Groups in the Context of Anti-Discrimination Legislation
- So You Got Punched By a Cop: Disciplinary Action or Civil Suit? Issue Estoppel in Penner v. Niagara (Police Services Board), 2010 ONCA 616
- The ‘Return to Unanimity’ in Insite and Division of Powers Jurisprudence: Chief Justice McLachlin’s ‘Oversight’
- UofT
- UofC
- UofA
- LexMonitor
- blawg