Emerging Challenges in the University Sector: - Hicks Morley

More documents

Recommendations

Info

4. Who is the client?• Does in-house counsel’s advice remain privilegedwhen the interests of corporate affiliates aredivergent?• What practices should companies and their in-housecounsel follow to protect privilege on a day-to-daybasis?Emerging Challenges in the University Sector:Staying a step ahead – March 28, 2012
Solicitor/Client Privilege in the University Context• Administration?• Senate?• Board?• Faculty?Emerging Challenges in the University Sector:Staying a step ahead – March 28, 2012
Page 6:
IntroductionSocial media benefits:
Page 10 and 11:
Social Media Issues: Students & Par
Page 12 and 13:
Legal ToolsNot-so-helpful precedent
Page 14 and 15:
Tips1. Review/revise computer use p
Page 16 and 17:
Pension and Benefits:Changing Lands
Page 18 and 19:
Reducing Pension Benefits• Signif
Page 20 and 21:
Reducing Pension Benefits• Defini
Page 22 and 23:
Halliburton Group Canada Inc. v. Al
Page 24 and 25:
Quinn v. New Brunswick, 2011 NBQB 1
Page 26 and 27:
Reducing Pension Benefits• Quinn
Page 28 and 29:
Retiree Benefits - Vesting Revisite
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Budget News - Pension• Reform mea
Page 38 and 39:
Budget News - PensionJSPPs (cont’
Page 40 and 41:
Budget News - PensionUniversity Pla
Page 42 and 43:
Pension and Benefits:Changing Lands
Page 44 and 45:
Highlights• Executive Compensatio
Page 46 and 47:
Executive Compensation• Base sala
Page 48 and 49:
Collective Bargaining• No wage fr
Page 50 and 51:
Collective Bargaining• To increas
Page 52 and 53:
Communicating During BargainingMich
Page 54 and 55:
Collective Bargaining 2012 - ETFO A
Page 56 and 57:
College Academic Bargaining• Prop
Page 58 and 59:
Employer Can Communicate During Bar
Page 60 and 61:
Cannot Circumvent Union• Kingston
Page 62 and 63:
Context Is Everything• Forinteck
Page 64 and 65:
Communicating During BargainingMich
Page 66 and 67:
Duty to Respond - General Principle
Page 68 and 69:
Case Study 1: Nelson v. Lakehead Un
Page 70 and 71:
Case Study 3: Miraglia v. Universit
Page 72 and 73:
Harassment and Discrimination Polic
Page 74 and 75:
Accessibility for Ontarians with Di
Page 76 and 77:
IAS: Select Standards - 2012 and 20
Page 78 and 79: IAS: Select Standards - 2015 to 202
Page 80 and 81: AODA - Project Planning• over 20
Page 82 and 83: ACADEMIC FREEDOMCustody and Control
Page 84 and 85: Arbitration• The Faculty Associat
Page 86 and 87: Results1) Adjudicator held that the
Page 88 and 89: ACADEMIC FREEDOMCustody and Control
Page 90 and 91: Overview1. Solicitor/Client Privile
Page 92 and 93: 1. Solicitor/Client Privilege: Prin
Page 98 and 99: 2. Rules of Professional Conduct: R
Page 100 and 101: 2. Practical Example of Rule 2.03
Page 102 and 103: 2. Practical Example of Rule 2.03
Page 104 and 105: 2. Rules of Professional Conduct: R
Page 106 and 107: 3. Managing Communication Pitfalls
Page 108 and 109: 3. Managing Communication Pitfalls
Page 110 and 111: 3. Dublin v. Montessori, 2006 (ON S
Page 112 and 113: 3. Dublin v. Montessori, 2006 (ON S
Page 114 and 115: 3. Kaganovsky v. 2057057 Ontario In
Page 116 and 117: 3. Kaganovsky v. 2057057 Ontario In
Page 118 and 119: 3. Lana v. University of Alberta, 2
Page 120 and 121: 4. Who is the client?• Privileged
Page 122 and 123: 4. Who is the client?• Where the
Page 124 and 125: 4. Who is the client?• Difficulti
Page 126 and 127: 4. Who is the client?• Issues tha
Page 130 and 131: Solicitor/Client Privilege in theUn
show all

Emerging Challenges in the University Sector: - Hicks Morley

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?