Search LESA Resources
Areas of Law
Content Type
Author
Find by author/faculty...
Author listing includes first and last names only.
Date
-
62043.05This paper provides a survey of case law on federal Crown priorities, with a particular emphasis on deemed-trust and enhanced garnishment mechanisms for source deductions and GST claims. Additional cases examining the “deemed security interest” and the “debts of equal degree” Crown prerogative are also discussed. This paper is part of a collection presented at LESA’s Personal Property Security and Debt Recovery Essentials program in Edmonton on May 17, 2017 and in Calgary on May 24, 2017.
-
62043.04This paper provides an overview of the enforcement remedies available to secured creditors under the Personal Property Security Act, receivership, and bankruptcy proceedings. In particular, the priority position of secured creditors and the impact of the enforcement process implemented on those priority positions is discussed. This paper is part of a collection presented at LESA’s Personal Property Security and Debt Recovery Essentials program in Edmonton on May 17, 2017 and in Calgary on May 24, 2017.
-
62039.05This paper considers common objections that are raised at trial. Topics discussed include admissibility, leading questions, non-expert opinion evidence, scope of expert opinion evidence, prior inconsistent statements, character evidence, re-examination, and other common sources of objections. Each topic includes strategic considerations and examples of relevant authorities. This paper is part of a collection presented at LESA’s Civil Advocacy Series: Evidence program in Edmonton on May 2, 2017 and in Calgary on May 4, 2017.
-
62039.04This paper provides an overview of the law of privilege. It also provides a case analysis of the following 4 decisions on privilege from the Supreme Court of Canada in 2016: Canada (Attorney General) v Chambre des notaires du Quebec, 2016 SCC 20; Canada (National Revenue) v Thompson, 2016 SCC 21; Lizotte v Aviva Insurance Co of Canada, 2016 SCC 52; and Alberta (Information and Privacy Commissioner) v University of Calgary, 2016 SCC 53. This paper is part of a collection presented at LESA’s Civil Advocacy Series: Evidence program in Edmonton on May 2, 2017 and in Calgary on May 4, 2017.
-
62039.03This paper discusses hearsay in civil litigation and why litigators should be cognizant of hearsay. It reviews the hearsay rule and the stages in a hearsay admissibility analysis. It also discusses the problems with hearsay from an evidentiary perspective. As well, statutory and regulatory admissibility of hearsay and common law exceptions to hearsay are considered, including traditional exceptions and principled exceptions. The paper highlights applicable case law throughout. This paper is part of a collection presented at LESA’s Civil Advocacy Series: Evidence program in Edmonton on May 2, 2017 and in Calgary on May 4, 2017.
-
62039.02A recent trilogy of cases from the Supreme Court of Canada, including White Burgess Langille Inman v Abbott and Haliburton Co [White Burgess], dealt with the “threshold” principles for admissibility of expert evidence. This paper provides a brief summary of the enhanced expert evidence framework as a result of White Burgess, and then reviews recent Alberta decisions that implement that framework. This paper is part of a collection presented at LESA’s Civil Advocacy Series: Evidence program in Edmonton on May 2, 2017 and in Calgary on May 4, 2017.
-
62039.01Typically, trial evidence must be formally proven, either by a witness’s testimony or by admissible documentary evidence. However, the most common source of dispensing with formal proof is judicial notice. This paper considers judicial notice, including tacit judicial notice, express judicial notice, and contextual judicial knowledge. It also discusses judicial notice of law and the application of judicial notice. With references to applicable case law throughout, the paper also identifies categories under which judicial notice has been found to be appropriate, and instances where judicial notice has been rejected in Canada. This paper is part of a collection presented at LESA’s Civil Advocacy Series: Evidence program in Edmonton on May 2, 2017 and in Calgary on May 4, 2017.
-
62036.05Rule 4.33 and 4.31 of the Rules of Court (often referred to as the “drop dead” and “chronic delay” rules) have recently be subject to amendment and judicial examination. This paper provides an overview of the developing law as it relates to the requirements for an application to dismiss an action for delay under rules 4.33 and 4.31. It reviews the 2016 amendments that added a suspension period to Rule 4.33, and discusses the test for a “significant advance” as it relates to Rule 4.33 in the context of recent case law. This paper also discusses the recent relaxation of the test applied by the courts under rule 4.31, and highlights the court’s treatment of inordinate delay, credible excuse, serious prejudice, and faded memories within the context of rule 4.31. This paper is part of a collection presented at LESA’s Rules of Court 2017 program held in Edmonton on April 6, 2017 and in Calgary on April 20, 2017.
-
62036.04This paper reviews the specific rules and exceptions in the Rules of Court for questioning certain categories of witnesses. In particular, it discusses questioning corporate representatives under rules 5.4, 5.17, 5.18, and 5.29. It also considers questioning minors under rule 5.17, including court applications to determine competence and providing adequate protection to a child in questioning. Finally, the paper discusses questioning professional defendants, highlighting relevant case law. This paper is part of a collection presented at LESA’s Rules of Court 2017 program held in Edmonton on April 6, 2017 and in Calgary on April 20, 2017.
-
62036.03This paper examines the use of questioning transcripts and notices to admit under rules 5.31 and 6.37 of the Rules of Court. It discusses the application of these rules, limitations and clarifications provided by case law, and practical tips for utilizing these evidentiary rules. This paper also provides some brief commentary on other evidentiary rules, including non-suits (rule 8.20) and exclusion of witnesses (rules 8.12 and 8.13). This paper is part of a collection presented at LESA’s Rules of Court 2017 program held in Edmonton on April 6, 2017 and in Calgary on April 20, 2017.
-
62036.02The amount of information that may be uncovered during discovery can be significantly broadened by considering records and information held by non-parties. This paper explores several tools available to counsel that may be employed to compel production for non-parties during discovery, including: Norwich orders (r 5.13); introducing evidence from another action (r 6.11(1)(f)); and undertakings to obtain records from third parties (r 5.30(1)(b)). The paper also discusses questioning non-parties under rules 5.17, 5.18, and 6.8, and considers some of the limitations on these rules illustrated by case law. This paper is part of a collection presented at LESA’s Rules of Court 2017 program held in Edmonton on April 6, 2017 and in Calgary on April 20, 2017.
-
62036.01Part 7 of the Rules of Court is devoted to the resolving claims without requiring a full trial. These rules provide litigants with various options to pursue for an expedited resolution of claims. This paper provides an overview of the rules in Part 7, outlines recent judicial consideration, and highlights practical and strategic application of those rules. In particular, the paper focuses on applications to resolve particular questions or issues (rule 7.1); applications for summary judgment (rules 7.2 and 7.3); and applications for judgment by way of summary trial (rule 7.5) This paper is part of a collection presented at LESA’s Rules of Court 2017 program held in Edmonton on April 6, 2017 and in Calgary on April 20, 2017.
