Criminal Law: Sentencing; Conditional Sentences
In the circumstances of this case, the sentencing judge proceeded from the assumption that the Appellant was “in custody and about to be sentenced on a more serious charge” for “accessory after the fact to murder” and that, therefore, a conditional sentence should not be considered.
This Week at the SCC: Who Regulates Grain Inspectors?
🚗 On Friday, October 30, 2026, the Supreme Court of Canada will release its decision in R. v. Moshfeghi Zadeh. At issue is when a brief lapse of attention amounts to the marked departure from reasonable driving required for criminal liability and whether the trial judge’s mistaken statement of the law affected her decision to acquit.
This Week at the SCC: When Does Inattention Become Dangerous Driving?
🚗 On Friday, October 30, 2026, the Supreme Court of Canada will release its decision in R. v. Moshfeghi Zadeh. At issue is when a brief lapse of attention amounts to the marked departure from reasonable driving required for criminal liability and whether the trial judge’s mistaken statement of the law affected her decision to acquit.
Civil Litigation: Leave to Appeal; Use of Generative AI
“AI does not replace the expertise and value of trained lawyers” who are capable of applying “professional training and judgment” to the materials produced by generative AI and “guard against” its known risks.
This Week at the SCC: When Does Medical Negligence Cause the Injury?
🏥 On Friday, October 23, 2026, the Supreme Court of Canada will release its decision in Hemmings v. Padmore. After Sophia Hemmings suffered a severe brain injury during childbirth, a trial judge found her obstetrician, anesthesiologist, and hospital liable. The Court of Appeal left only the anesthesiologist liable. At issue is what patients must prove to connect negligent medical care to their injuries and how closely appellate courts should scrutinize the trial judge’s reasons.
Class Actions: Certification; Novel Duty of Care; Vicarious Liability
The Court of Appeal in this case agreed that “a cause of action for vicarious liability is not disclosed in the amended statement of claim.