Keeping Tabs October 2018

Stay up-to-date on news and events from our Young Advocates' Standing Committee (YASC) with Keeping Tabs.  In this issue: Chair Chat - Victoria Creighton, Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP In The News Legislation Update - Julie Mouris, Conway Baxter Wilson LLP/s.r.l. YASC Report - Carlo Di Carlo, Stockwoods LLP Barristers Interview - Compiled by Alexandra Shelley, Torys LLP YouTube Series - Erin H. Durant, Borden Ladner Gervais LLP

Stay up-to-date on news and events from our Young Advocates' Standing Committee (YASC) with Keeping Tabs. 

In this issue:
Chair Chat - Victoria Creighton, Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP
In The News
Legislation Update - Julie Mouris, Conway Baxter Wilson LLP/s.r.l.
YASC Report - Carlo Di Carlo, Stockwoods LLP Barristers
Interview - Compiled by Alexandra Shelley, Torys LLP
YouTube Series - Erin H. Durant, Borden Ladner Gervais LLP


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

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.


The Advocates’ Society<br />

<strong>October</strong> <strong>2018</strong>


04<br />

09<br />

10<br />

13<br />

16<br />

18<br />

Chair Chat<br />

Victoria Creighton, Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP<br />

In The News<br />

Legislation Update<br />

Julie Mouris, Conway Baxter Wilson LLP/s.r.l.<br />

YASC Report<br />

Carlo Di Carlo, Stockwoods LLP Barristers<br />

Interview<br />

Compiled by Alexandra Shelley, Torys LLP<br />

YouTube Series<br />

Erin H. Durant, Borden Ladner Gervais LLP<br />

Mastering the art and craft of advocacy is a career-long commitment and we are<br />

here to help. The Advocates’ Society has been the premier provider of advocacy<br />

skills training for over 30 years. We are proud to provide lawyers across Canada<br />

with the training and the confidence they need to execute on their feet when it<br />

counts. The Judge will notice…your clients will too.<br />

Editor: Erin Pleet, Thornton Grout Finnigan LLP | EPleet@tgf.ca<br />

The Young Advocates’ Standing Committee (“YASC”) is a standing committee of The Advocates’ Society with a mandate to be a voice for young advocates<br />

(advocates who are ten years of call or fewer) within the Society and within the profession. We do this through networking/mentoring events, by<br />

publishing articles by and for young advocates, and by raising issues of concern to young advocates as we work with the Society’s Board of Directors.<br />

The opinions expressed by individual authors are their own and do not necessarily reflect the policies of The Advocates’ Society.<br />

Visit www.advocates.ca. Be part of the legacy of extraordinary advocates.<br />



(Click on the program to learn more)<br />


OCT 30<br />

OCT 31<br />

NOV 1<br />

Chair Chat<br />

Victoria Creighton, Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP<br />

The Big Mingle<br />

Vancouver<br />

Defamation<br />

Law<br />

Toronto Mentoring<br />

Dinner Series<br />

4<br />

Throughout August and September,<br />

Toronto was gripped with constitutional<br />

fever. You couldn’t go<br />

to any legal party without everyone<br />

showing off their newly rediscovered<br />

expertise on sections<br />

2, 15 and unwritten constitutional<br />

principles. The notwithstanding<br />

clause was trending on Twitter.<br />

And young advocates were deeply<br />

involved. Current and former<br />

YASC members, TAS members,<br />

and even my legal-aid office mate’s<br />

lovely wife – young advocates all –<br />

argued the issues in the Superior<br />

Court and the Court of Appeal. It<br />

was a real pleasure watching so<br />

many young advocates contribute<br />

with skill and passion.<br />

It was wonderful to meet so many<br />

young advocates at Fall Forum in<br />

Blue Mountain last weekend. The<br />

CPD programming was great, the<br />

keynote from The Hon. Justice Suzanne<br />

Côté of the Supreme Court<br />

of Canada was both informative<br />

and hilarious, and the social events<br />

were as fun as always. All in all, it<br />

was a great time to catch up with<br />

friends from across Canada.<br />

In this issue of <strong>Keeping</strong> <strong>Tabs</strong>, Carlo<br />

Di Carlo highlights the speaking<br />

opportunities for young advocates<br />

at The Advocates’ Society’s<br />

Securities Symposium, we interview<br />

young advocate Tony Paciocco<br />

from Ottawa, Julie Mouris<br />

provides an overview of the Ontario<br />

Court of Appeal’s first wave<br />

of rulings on anti-SLAPP legislation,<br />

and, as always, we celebrate<br />

young advocates in the news.<br />

YASC is always looking for member<br />

contributions for <strong>Keeping</strong> <strong>Tabs</strong>.<br />

On a happy note, we wish our editor,<br />

Caroline Youdan, a safe and<br />

wonderful early parental leave! If<br />

you have something to say about<br />

a case, your life as an advocate or<br />

a great experience at a TAS event,<br />

please tell our interim editor, Erin<br />

Pleet at epleet@tgf.ca. If you’re<br />

looking to get involved more generally,<br />

join our Volunteer Roster<br />

by emailing Alexandra Shelley at<br />

ashelley@torys.com.<br />

NOV 5<br />

Class Actions Practice<br />

Group Bench and<br />

Bar Reception<br />

NOV 21<br />

Credibility for<br />

Litigators<br />

NOV 14<br />

Kingston<br />

Pub Night<br />

DEC 13<br />

President’s Festive<br />

Reception<br />

NOV 15<br />

Estates Litigation<br />

Bench & Bar<br />

Reception<br />

NOV 14<br />

Young Advocates’<br />

Pub Night<br />

NOV 18<br />

Santa Claus<br />


AWARDS<br />

Civility Award<br />

Recipient: Myriam Seers, Torys LLP<br />

Accepted by: Alexandra Shelley, Torys LLP<br />

This award recognizes a young advocate<br />

who epitomizes the Principles of Civility<br />

and Professionalism. This is the only<br />

award that proceeds by nomination.<br />

Candidates for this award can only be<br />

nominated by a fellow young advocate<br />

practicing in a different firm or organization<br />

from them. Calls for nominations<br />

are made via Twitter and mass email to<br />

TAS members.<br />

Photographed from left to right: John Russo, Pallett Valo<br />

LLP; Scott Maidment, McMillan LLP; Alexandra Shelley,<br />

Torys LLP; Victoria Creighton, Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP.<br />

YASC Award Sponsored by<br />

Outstanding<br />

Participation<br />

Award<br />

Recipient: Christopher J. Somerville,<br />

Affleck Greene McMurtry LLP<br />

This award is given to the individual who<br />

has participated in the most TAS activities<br />

(CPD programs, events, practice groups)<br />

in the preceding 24 months. The data<br />

regarding participant activity is extracted<br />

from the Society’s database.<br />

Photographed from left to right: Victoria Creighton, Osler,<br />

Hoskin & Harcourt LLP; Christopher J. Somerville, Affleck<br />

Greene McMurtry LLP; Scott Maidment, McMillan LLP.<br />

Commitment<br />

to Pro Bono<br />

Award<br />

Recipient: Cameron Fiske,<br />

Milosevic Fiske LLP<br />

This award recognizes exceptional participation<br />

in TAS and TAS/PBO joint initiatives<br />

such as the Child Advocacy Project, Law<br />

Help Centres at the Superior Court of Justice<br />

and Small Claims Court, the Appeals<br />

Assistance Program, Law Society Tribunal<br />

Duty Counsel Program as well as the Law<br />

Society of Upper Canada Duty Counsel<br />

Program and the Ontario Securities Commission<br />

Litigation Assistance Program. The<br />

award is based on a combination of number<br />

of appearances and outstanding work,<br />

either cumulatively or on a single case.<br />

Writer’s Award<br />

Recipient: Sabrina A. Lucenti,<br />

Dooley Lucenti Barristers & Solicitors<br />

This award recognizes outstanding<br />

contribution to TAS publications. It is<br />

measured by articles written for <strong>Keeping</strong><br />

<strong>Tabs</strong>, Advocacy Matters, Practice Group<br />

blogs and/or the Advocates’ Journal.<br />

Photographed from left to right: Victoria Creighton,<br />

Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP; Sabrina A. Lucenti,<br />

Dooley Lucenti Barristers & Solicitors; Scott Maidment,<br />

McMillan LLP.<br />

Photographed from left to right: Victoria Creighton,<br />

Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP; Cameron Fiske, Milosevic<br />

Fiske LLP; Scott Maidment, McMillan LLP.<br />

6 7


Young Advocates in the News<br />

In this feature, we highlight TAS young advocate members in the news. All of the lawyers profiled<br />

have been called to the bar in the last ten years.<br />

If you or a fellow young advocate has had a recent brush with the media about your/their work on<br />

a case, please forward the news story link to:<br />

Andrew Eckart, andrew@eckartmediation.com; or<br />

Thomas Milne, tmilne@nncfirm.ca<br />

• Regina Bypass engineer defends Capital Pointe’s safety at hearing. Regina Leader-Post, August<br />

2, <strong>2018</strong>. Sahil Shoor, associate at Gowling WLG, is representing a developer on appeal of an Order to<br />

Comply issued by the City of Regina.<br />

Your Next<br />

Challenge Is Here<br />

The Advocates’ Society Career Board is the only legal<br />

job board created just for the litigation bar. Access<br />

notices for litigation, ADR and judicial vacancies that<br />

are exclusively listed for advocates across Canada.<br />

To find your next position visit www.advocates.ca<br />

• Landlords beware: Insurance won’t cover damages caused by tenant drug operations.<br />

The Globe and Mail, July 9, <strong>2018</strong>. Gord McGuire, partner at Adair Goldblatt Bieber, writes about<br />

the implications of Carteri v Saskatchewan Mutual Insurance Company, <strong>2018</strong> SKQB 150, in which<br />

the court found that the landlords’ insurer was not liable to pay damages caused by the tenants’<br />

drug operations.<br />

• Ontario Court of Appeal decision answers ‘big legal questions’ on SLAPP suits. Canadian<br />

Lawyer, August 30, <strong>2018</strong>. Ben Kates, former YASC Chair and associate at Stockwoods LLP Barristers,<br />

comments on six new rulings regarding the Province’s anti-SLAPP legislation, their significance, and<br />

a plaintiff’s onus in responding to a defendant’s anti-SLAPP motion in the context of litigation.<br />

• Court hears arguments on both sides of Alberta’s gay-straight alliance law. The Globe and<br />

Mail, June 20, <strong>2018</strong>. Brendan MacArthur-Stevens, associate at Blakes, Cassels & Graydon LLP’s<br />

Calgary office, represented an intervenor to oppose an injunction application seeking to restrain<br />

a law facilitating the creation of gay-straight alliances (“GSAs”) and banning schools from advising<br />

parents that their children have joined a GSA. The application was eventually dismissed. The<br />

appeal will be heard in the fall.<br />



First wave of Ontario Court<br />

of Appeal rulings on<br />

anti-SLAPP legislation<br />

Julie Mouris, Conway Baxter Wilson LLP/s.r.l.<br />

Introduction<br />

On August 30, <strong>2018</strong>, the Court of Appeal for Ontario released six<br />

highly-anticipated decisions interpreting Ontario’s anti-SLAPP [Strategic<br />

Litigation Against Public Participation] legislation. 1 Section<br />

137.1 of the Courts of Justice Act, in force since the fall of 2015, allows<br />

a defendant in a proceeding to bring a motion, at any time after the<br />

proceeding has been commenced, to have the action dismissed. This<br />

tool is commonly used in defamation cases. The Court of Appeal has<br />

clarified the application of the two-part test under s. 137.1(3) and (4).<br />

The Two-Part Test: sections 137.1(3) and (4)<br />

First, under s. 137.1(3), a defendant must satisfy<br />

the judge that the proceeding arises from<br />

an expression that is a matter of public interest.<br />

Second, if the defendant succeeds, the<br />

onus shifts to the plaintiff under s. 137.1(4) to<br />

satisfy the judge that:<br />

(a) there are grounds to believe that,<br />

(i) the proceeding has substantial<br />

merit, and<br />

(ii) the moving party has no valid defence<br />

in the proceeding; and<br />

(b) the harm likely to be or have been suffered<br />

by the responding party as a result<br />

of the moving party’s expression is sufficiently<br />

serious that the public interest in<br />

permitting the proceeding to continue<br />

outweighs the public interest in protecting<br />

that expression.<br />

The Court of Appeal held that in assessing<br />

the “merits-based hurdle” (s.<br />

137.1(4)(a)), a judge must avoid taking<br />

a deep dive into the ultimate merits of<br />

the claim and the defences. Rather, the<br />

judge must determine in a preliminary<br />

way whether a trier of fact could reasonably<br />

conclude that the claim has a<br />

real chance of success, and that none<br />

of the defences advanced would succeed.<br />

The applicable standard of proof<br />

for both inquiries is the balance of<br />

probabilities.<br />

Of particular interest is the Court’s<br />

interpretation of the “public interest<br />

hurdle” (s. 137.1(4)(b)), which involves a<br />

balancing test of harm. Justice Doherty<br />

described that provision as “the heart<br />

of Ontario’s Anti-SLAPP legislation. The<br />

section declares that some claims that<br />

target expression on matters of public<br />

interest are properly terminated on a s.<br />

137.1 motion, even though they could<br />

succeed on their merits at trial.” 2 The<br />

Court held that to demonstrate harm,<br />

a plaintiff must show a causal link between<br />

the impugned expression and<br />

the alleged damages, and that bald allegations<br />

of damages in pleadings or<br />

affidavits will not be sufficient.<br />

Overall, the Court has given effect to<br />

the purpose of the anti-SLAPP legislation,<br />

which is to encourage expression<br />

on matters of public interest while balancing<br />

the protection of reputation.<br />

Justice Doherty captured the spirit of<br />

the legislation well: “not every foot over<br />

the defamatory foul line warrants dragging<br />

the offender through the litigation<br />

process. By enacting s. 137.1, the Legislature<br />

acknowledged that, in some<br />

circumstances, permitting the wronged<br />

party to seek vindication through litigation<br />

comes at too high a cost to freedom<br />

of expression.” 3<br />

10 11

The Broad Trend Toward<br />

Amending Defamation Laws<br />

Ontario’s anti-SLAPP legislation<br />

is part of a broader trend<br />

in various jurisdictions to modernize<br />

defamation laws. For<br />

instance, in 2013, the United<br />

Kingdom enacted the Defamation<br />

Act, 2013 which, among<br />

other things, sets a serious<br />

harm threshold. On November<br />

13-14, <strong>2018</strong>, the UK Supreme<br />

Court will be hearing the appeal<br />

of Lachaux v Independent<br />

Print Ltd to determine the circumstances<br />

in which serious<br />

harm can be inferred in the absence<br />

of evidence of harm. 4<br />

Aside from the anti-SLAPP legislation,<br />

more change could be<br />

coming to Ontario’s defamation<br />

laws. The Law Commission of<br />

Ontario (LCO) is currently undertaking<br />

a comprehensive review<br />

of the province’s defamation<br />

law. As the LCO explains, “the<br />

Defamation in the Internet Age<br />

project considers whether or<br />

how defamation law should be<br />

reformed in light of fast-moving<br />

and far-reaching developments<br />

in law, technology and social values.”<br />

5 The project’s first phase<br />

of consultation is now over and<br />

the LCO is preparing an interim<br />

report with draft law reform<br />

recommendations. The release<br />

of the interim report will be followed<br />

by further consultations.<br />

In the coming months, defamation<br />

law junkies will have lots<br />

to watch for: more anti-SLAPP<br />

appeals being heard at the<br />

Court of Appeal on February 11-<br />

15, 2019, the Lachaux appeal at<br />

the UK Supreme Court, and the<br />

LCO’s draft law reform recommendations.<br />

Stay tuned!<br />


Endnotes<br />

1. 1704604 Ontario Ltd. v. Pointes<br />

Protection Association, <strong>2018</strong><br />

ONCA 685 [Pointes]; Able<br />

Translations Ltd. v. Express<br />

International Translation Inc.,<br />

<strong>2018</strong> ONCA 690; Armstrong v.<br />

Corus Entertainment Inc., <strong>2018</strong><br />

ONCA 689 [Corus]; Fortress<br />

Real Developments Inc. v.<br />

Rabidoux, <strong>2018</strong> ONCA 686;<br />

Platnick v. Bent, <strong>2018</strong> ONCA<br />

687; Veneruzzo v. Storey, <strong>2018</strong><br />

ONCA 688.<br />

2. Pointes, supra note 1 at para.<br />

86.<br />

3. Corus, supra note 1 at para.<br />

90.<br />

4. See UK Supreme Court,<br />

Lachaux (Respondent) v.<br />

Independent Print Limited<br />

and another (Appellant), Case<br />

Details, online: .<br />

5. Law Commission of Ontario,<br />

“Defamation in the Internet<br />

Age: Consultation Paper”<br />

(November 2017) at p. 1,<br />

online: .<br />

The Advocates’ Society’s<br />

Securities Symposium<br />

Gives Young Advocates<br />

a Chance to Shine<br />

Carlo Di Carlo, Stockwoods LLP Barristers<br />

The Advocates’ Society’s 8 th Annual Securities Symposium took place on<br />

September 5, <strong>2018</strong>. The event—a significant one in the calendars of securities<br />

litigators—provides a platform for presenters, including staff lawyers from securities<br />

regulators, representatives from insurers, and defence counsel, to discuss<br />

emerging issues relevant to the practice of securities litigation. This year was no<br />

exception, as speakers presented on a broad range of topics, including changes in<br />

the law regarding the scope of privilege in the internal investigation context; issues<br />

12 13

surrounding cryptocurrencies;<br />

foreign corrupt practices legislation<br />

in the US and Canada; and<br />

issues related to the legalization<br />

of cannabis. The different backgrounds<br />

of the speakers led to<br />

unique perspectives on the issues<br />

as well as interesting panel<br />

discussions and debates.<br />

What really separates the Securities<br />

Symposium from other<br />

CPD programs, however, is<br />

What really separates the<br />

Securities Symposium<br />

from other CPD programs,<br />

however, is its focus<br />

on providing speaking<br />

opportunities for<br />

younger advocates.<br />

its focus on providing speaking<br />

opportunities for younger advocates.<br />

In organizing the program<br />

for the Symposium, the<br />

Securities Litigation Practice<br />

Group places an emphasis on<br />

selecting lawyers at the outset<br />

of their careers. Given that<br />

CPD programs tend to feature<br />

more senior members of<br />

the bar, the Symposium gives<br />

younger lawyers a rare chance<br />

to build their profiles, as well<br />

as get experience speaking in<br />

front of their colleagues.<br />

For many of this year’s presenters,<br />

the Symposium was<br />

their first opportunity to<br />

speak at a conference. Alexandra<br />

Matushenko, from the<br />

Ontario Securities Commission<br />

, was one of the first-time<br />

speakers. Ms. Matushenko,<br />

who presented on the internal<br />

investigation panel, appreciated<br />

the experience.<br />

“There aren’t a lot of speaking<br />

opportunities available to<br />

Left to right: Carlo Di Carlo, Stockwoods LLP,<br />

Alexandra Matushenko, Ontario Securities Commission,<br />

and Sandeep J. Joshi, BMO Financial Group<br />

young lawyers, especially ones where senior members<br />

of the bar are present and engaged. It was<br />

great to get the practice of presenting my views on<br />

a challenging topic before a large audience”.<br />

Joseph Blinick, an associate at Bennett Jones LLP,<br />

was another first-time speaker. He also found the<br />

experience to be “invaluable, especially for young<br />

advocates who welcome the opportunity to get<br />

on their feet to speak about a topic they are passionate<br />

about”. Mr. Blinick also commented that<br />

it was “great to get to meet with members of Enforcement<br />

Staff in a more social setting. It gives<br />

you the chance to build a bit of a rapport outside<br />

the more adversarial confines of interactions on<br />

regulatory investigations and inquiries”.<br />

Evan Thomas, a litigation associate at Osler, Hoskin<br />

& Harcourt LLP who presented on cryptocurrencies,<br />

agrees. “The event gives lawyers who might not have<br />

a lot of experience in the securities field a chance to<br />

get to know some of the ‘regulars’ a bit better.”<br />

As the experiences of these speakers make clear,<br />

the Symposium provides young advocates with a<br />

platform that they don’t typically get early on in their<br />

practice. It also allows them to meet different lawyers<br />

practicing in the area and develop their networks.<br />

Young advocates should be on the lookout for these<br />

types of opportunities—they’re an invaluable way to<br />

start profile-building early.<br />

14 15

Q. Which talent would you<br />

most like to have?<br />

A. The ability to read a judge’s mind, particularly<br />

at that critical juncture when they ask<br />

me if I’m calling any evidence.<br />

Q. What is your greatest extravagance<br />

in your everyday life?<br />

A. Probably Lunch #2, especially if Lunch<br />

#1 is a salad.<br />

Q. From whom have you learned the most about the practice of law?<br />

A. My mother. My father and sister are lawyers; my mother is not. Still, my mother taught me<br />

how to understand and sympathize with people, and therefore much about the practice of law.<br />

Q. What is your<br />

favourite drink?<br />

A. Diet Pepsi. And whiskey.<br />

Drunk separately,<br />

of course.<br />

Q. What is the latest<br />

non-legal book<br />

you’ve read?<br />

A. The Hunters, by<br />

James Salter.<br />

Q. Who or what is the<br />

greatest love of your life?<br />

A. Cheese. Yes, my family<br />

came second to cheese.<br />


Interview with<br />

Anthony (Tony) Paciocco<br />

Edelson & Friedman Barristers LLP<br />

Ottawa, Ontario<br />

Compiled by Alexandra Shelley, Torys LLP<br />

Q. Which living lawyer do<br />

you most admire?<br />

A. Michael Edelson, and not<br />

just because he signs my<br />

pay cheque. He owns every<br />

courtroom he walks into.<br />

Q. How would your colleagues<br />

describe you?<br />

A. Diligent. Committed.<br />

And allergic to peanuts.<br />

Q. What unique knowledge have you gleaned in your practice<br />

that you can share with other<br />

A. The paradox of advocacy is exactly this—you are at once doing<br />

better and worse than you think. That you are speaking for those<br />

who lack the training to say it themselves matters, but that you<br />

continue to find ways to say it better yourself matters too.<br />

Q. If you weren’t a lawyer<br />

what would you be?<br />

A. A struggling sports journalist<br />

or travel writer.<br />

Q. What is your most<br />

distinctive characteristic?<br />

A. My last name.<br />

And my socks.<br />

Q. Why did you become a litigator or advocate?<br />

A. I spent twenty-odd years losing arguments at home and<br />

figured if I stuck at it long enough after leaving the nest,<br />

things would swing my way. On occasion, they now do.<br />

Q. What is your year of<br />

call?<br />

A. 2015.<br />

Q. What do you like most<br />

about your practice?<br />

A. The people I work with,<br />

and more than I would<br />

have thought, the people<br />

I work for.<br />

Q. Which word do you<br />

prefer: litigator or<br />

advocate?<br />

A. Advocate. Try saying<br />

“The Litigators’ Society”<br />

five times fast.<br />

Q. What would you<br />

consider your greatest<br />

achievement?<br />

A. That one’s easy. Convincing<br />

my girlfriend to move<br />

from Toronto to Ottawa.<br />

Q. What is your favourite case?<br />

A. R. v. Stinchcombe (1991, SCC). The fruits of an investigation<br />

are not the property of the Crown for use in securing<br />

a conviction but the property of the public to be<br />

used to ensure that justice is done (para. 12).<br />

Q. What is your<br />

greatest fear in practice?<br />

A. That I will do a<br />

competent job, but just<br />

that and not more.<br />

Q. What should people know about the life of a criminal defence lawyer in Ottawa?<br />

A. The work is interesting and diverse. Most of your caseload is at one courthouse, which<br />

is nice, as you won’t spend your entire practice in your car. While the local bar is warm and<br />

collegial, the winter is cold and inhumane.<br />

16 17


The Big Mingle<br />

<strong>October</strong> 10, <strong>2018</strong><br />

Windsor<br />


TAS Legends of the Bar<br />

Erin H. Durant, Borden Ladner Gervais LLP<br />

The Young Advocates’ Standing<br />

Committee is pleased to announce<br />

the launch of the TAS<br />

Legends of the Bar YouTube<br />

Series. TAS has a rich, archived<br />

catalogue of historic lectures<br />

and speeches from legends of<br />

the litigation bar. YASC has been<br />

reviewing these archives and<br />

will be releasing the videos on<br />

YouTube bi-monthly.<br />

Our first video is the 1998 Dubin<br />

Lecture by the Edward L.<br />

Greenspan, Q.C. We hope you<br />

will enjoy his wit, charm and<br />

well-thought remarks.<br />

Fall Forum <strong>2018</strong><br />

<strong>October</strong> 19 & 20, <strong>2018</strong><br />

Blue Mountains<br />

Fall Forum <strong>2018</strong><br />

<strong>October</strong> 19, <strong>2018</strong><br />

Blue Mountains<br />

The Hon. Justice<br />

Suzanne Côté,<br />

Supreme Court<br />

of Canada<br />

18 19

Fall Forum <strong>2018</strong><br />

<strong>October</strong> 19 & 20, <strong>2018</strong><br />

Blue Mountains<br />

Panel: Practice and<br />

Procedure from<br />

Coast to Coast<br />

Ottawa Fireside Chat<br />

<strong>October</strong> 15, <strong>2018</strong><br />

Ottawa<br />

Left to right: Marc-André<br />

Roy, Senate of Canada<br />

and The Hon. Thomas A.<br />

Cromwell, C.C., Borden<br />

Ladner Gervais LLP<br />

Fall Forum <strong>2018</strong><br />

<strong>October</strong> 19 & 20, <strong>2018</strong><br />

Blue Mountains<br />

Toronto Fireside Chat<br />

<strong>October</strong> 4, <strong>2018</strong><br />

Toronto<br />

Left to right: Sandra<br />

Barton, Gowling WLG<br />

Canada LLP and The<br />

Honourable Justice<br />

Cynthia Petersen,<br />

Superior Court of Justice<br />

20 21


Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!