Results | SCC-Authors-Cited

Maillette, H. (2019). Incidents qui mettent fin à l’instance. In P.-C. Lafond (Ed.), JurisClasseur Québec. Procédure civile. I. (2e ed.). LexisNexis. (Original work published 2015)

Lafond, P. (2018). Introduction. In P.-C. Lafond & M.-C. Belleau (Eds.), Régler autrement les différends (Deuxième édition.). LexisNexis Canada Inc.

Fricero, N. (2019). Audience et débats. In P. Carillon & R. Perrot (Eds.), *JurisClasseur France — Procédure civile*. LexisNexis.

Encyclopédie juridique de droit français. Donne l'état des diverses branches du droit en France: doctrine, jurisprudence, index bibliographique, certains périodiques en texte intégral (exhaustivité variable)

Fricero, N. (2018). Désistement. In P. Carillon & R. Perrot (Eds.), *JurisClasseur France — Procédure civile*. LexisNexis.

Encyclopédie juridique de droit français. Donne l'état des diverses branches du droit en France: doctrine, jurisprudence, index bibliographique, certains périodiques en texte intégral (exhaustivité variable)

Guillemard, S. (2016). Réflexions autour des sept premiers articles du *Code de procédure civile*. In S. Guillemard (Ed.), Le Code de procédure civile: quelles nouveautés? (p. 123). Éditions Yvon Blais.

Guillemard, S. (2017). pièce. In Comprendre la procédure civile québécoise (2e édition.). Éditions Yvon Blais.

LeBel, L. (2015). La loi et le droit : la nature de la fonction créatrice du juge dans le système de droit québécois. Les Cahiers de droit, 56(1), 85–96. https://doi.org/10.7202/1028956ar

An article from Les Cahiers de droit, on Érudit.

View on www.erudit.org

Piché, C. (2014). La disposition préliminaire du Code de procédure civile. Revue Du Barreau, 73, 135.

Piché‑Messier, M., & McNicoll, A. B. (2019). Développements récents en matière de propriété intellectuelle dans le cadre des ordonnances de type *Anton Piller*, *Mareva* et *Norwich*. In Développements récents en droit de la propriété intellectuelle (Vol. 464, p. 89). Éditions Yvon Blais.

Plamondon, J. (2016). Les principes directeurs et le nouveau Code de procédure civile (art. 17 à 24 C.p.c.). In S. Guillemard (Ed.), Le Code de procédure civile: quelles nouveautés? (p. 27). Éditions Yvon Blais.

Thériault, M. (2015). Le défi du passage vers la nouvelle culture juridique de la justice participative. La Revue Du Barreau, 74, 1.

Côté, P.-A., & LeBel, L. (2011). La méthode d’interprétation moderne: le juge devant lui‑même et en lui‑même. In M. Devinat & S. Beaulac (Eds.), Interpretatio non cessat: mélanges en l’honneur de Pierre-André Côté = essays in honour of Pierre-André Côté (p. 103). Éditions Y. Blais.

Reid, H. (2015). pièce. In Dictionnaire de droit québécois et canadien: avec table des abréviations et lexique anglais-français (5e édition.). Wilson & Lafleur.

Reid, H. (2015). désistement. In Dictionnaire de droit québécois et canadien: avec table des abréviations et lexique anglais-français (5e édition.). Wilson & Lafleur.

Cromwell, T. H. T. A., Anstis, S., & Touchie, T. (2017). Revisiting the Role of Presumptions of Legislative Intent in Statutory Interpretation. The Canadian Bar Review, 95(2). https://cbr.cba.org/index.php/cbr/article/view/4410

This paper proposes a fundamental reshaping of the law regarding presumptions of legislative intent in statutory interpretation. Looking to substantive presumptions in particular, it reviews the jurisprudence and concludes that greater consistency would be desirable and that tensions should be resolved between the traditional approach to substantive presumptions and the modern approach to statutory interpretation consistently adopted by the Supreme Court of Canada. Our proposal seeks to provide a uniform methodology for the use of substantive presumptions by incorporating them into the contextual analysis mandated by the modern approach set out in Re Rizzo & Rizzo Shoes Ltd, [1998] 1 SCR 27, 154 DLR (4th) 193. Rejecting the language of “presumptions” and rules of “strict” or “liberal” construction, it argues in favour of interpretation that relies on a transparent discussion of all relevant sources of statutory meaning (including textual and contextual sources, such as the values underlying substantive presumptions) and against a reflexive or mechanical application of substantive presumptions.

View on cbr.cba.org

Bachand, F. (2015). Les principes généraux de la justice civile et le nouveau Code de procédure civile. McGill Law Journal, 61(2), 447–459. https://doi.org/10.7202/1037252ar

An article from McGill Law Journal / Revue de droit de McGill, on Érudit.

View on www.erudit.org

Dalphond, P. J., & Nag, A. (2019). Enfin une réforme de la Loi sur le divorce. Revue Du Barreau, 78, 255.

Gordon, M. L. (2012). An Update on Retroactive Child and Spousal Support: Five Years after S.(DB) VG (SR). Canadian Family Law Quarterly, 31(1), 71.

Sowter, D. M. (2018). Advocacy in Non-Adversarial Family Law: A Recommendation for Revision to the Model Code. Windsor Yearbook of Access to Justice, 35, 401–432. https://doi.org/10.22329/wyaj.v35i0.5788

Family law is evolving towards non-adversarial dispute resolution processes. As a result, some family lawyers are representing clients who are trying to reach settlements that recognize their interests, instead of just pursuing their legal rights. By responding to the full spectrum of client needs, lawyers are required to behave differently than they do when they are representing a client in a traditional civil litigation file. They consider the emotional and financial consequences of relationship breakdown – things that are not typically within the purview of the family law lawyer. They objectively reality check with their clients, and they approach interest-based negotiations in a client-centric way. These lawyers view their role as that of a non-adversarial advocate, and their clients as whole people with interests that are not just legal. This paper draws on an empirical study involving focus groups with family law lawyers, to argue that the Federation of Law Societies of Canada’sModel Code of Professional Conductneeds to be updated to incorporate non-adversarial advocacy. The lawyers in the study viewed non-adversarial advocacy as being responsive to client needs, and in the interest of clients’ children. This paper draws from the study to establish what constitutes non-adversarial advocacy and then it presents a proposal for revising Rule 5 (Advocacy) of the Model Code.

View on www.erudit.org

Hughes, K. (2012). A Behavioural Understanding of Privacy and its Implications for Privacy Law. The Modern Law Review, 75(5), 806–836. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.2012.00925.x

This article draws upon social interaction theory (the work of Irwin Altman) to develop a theory of the right to privacy, which reflects the way that privacy is experienced. This theory states that the right to privacy is a right to respect for barriers, and that an invasion of privacy occurs when a privacy barrier is penetrated. The first part of the paper establishes the position of the author's theory in the existing scholarship. The second part of the paper expands upon the theory to explain the nature of privacy barriers and the way that the author's theory manages a number of specific privacy issues, including threats to privacy, attempted invasions of privacy, unforeseeable interferences with privacy and waiving the right to privacy. The final part of the paper demonstrates the impact that this approach to privacy could have upon judicial reasoning, in particular Article 8 European Convention on Human Rights.

View on onlinelibrary.wiley.com

Your search

Results 698 resources

Explore

Resource type

Topics

Publication year