The Golden Horseshoe Co‑operative Housing Federation hosted its annual housing Winter Workshop conference on January 25, 2014. Despite the weather, the turnout was impressive. The workshops covered a range of practical topics including re‑financing, member participation, arrears, the duty to accommodate (presented by Iler Campbell) and the legal implications of hoarding (presented by Iler Campbell).
Continue reading “Iler Campbell at Golden Horseshoe Winter Workshop”
Last week, in Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s address to the Israeli Knesset, he equated criticisms of the Israeli state and its policies with anti-Semitism. He stated that “most disgracefully of all, some openly call Israel an apartheid state,” continuing on to say that “it is nothing short of sickening.”
Mr. Harper’s strong condemnation of individuals who criticize Israel’s policies and practices raises serious concerns about his government’s commitment to protecting political speech in Canada. His comments should be seen in light of his government’s claw‑back of hate speech legislation in the name of freedom of expression. In acting as a champion of freedom of expression, while targeting critics of the Israeli government and its policies, Mr. Harper has attempted to redefine political speech as speech that would meet the definition of hate speech under the Criminal Code. These contradictory actions should raise serious doubts about whose expression the Harper government is actually committed to protecting.
Lauren Blumas, our articling student, has an article in the current issue of the Canadian Journal of Poverty Law. Read her article here (pdf).
In Lancaster v. Compliance Audit Committee et al., 2013 ONSC 7631 (CanLII) Justice Quinn discussed in detail the principles that should apply to an award of costs against a public interest litigant. In that case an appeal was brought regarding an audit committee decision not to investigate a campaign finance issue under the Municipal Elections Act.
The elector, Lancaster, made an audit complaint relating to the campaign finances of various individuals and when the audit committee under the Act ended the audit proceedings, appealed to the Ontario Court of Justice under s.81(6) of the Municipal Elections Act. The Ontario Court of Justice dismissed the appeal. The elector then appealed to the Superior Court of Justice, who dismissed the appeal again.
On December 20, 2013, the Supreme Court of Canada released a landmark decision on Canada’s prostitution laws (Canada (Attorney General) v. Bedford). This decision represents a huge victory for Canada’s sex workers by recognizing that the existing legal framework increases the risk of harm to the lives and safety of individuals working in the industry. The decision has, however, quickly become controversial with anti-prostitution advocates vigorously arguing that the Court has effectively endorsed the exploitation of women. This criticism is misdirected because the Bedford decision is not about whether prostitution should be legal in Canada — prostitution has always been legal here. If you don’t like it, complain to Parliament.
|
Older Entries |
Subscribe to our RSS feed
Find us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter