Posts tagged Bruce Ryder
[Eric & Lola Roundtable] Margot Young: Liberty with a Vengeance
May 14th
Sonia: So, do you think that this case sets up a new approach to section 15 (again)? What’ significant about the way that the section 15 analyses are carried out, compared to previous cases and the divergent decisions in this case? What about the approach to the “line” between section 15 and section 1?
All the posts in our roundtable can be found here. We started on Monday with Bruce Ryder, and heard from Hester Lessard on Wednesday and Robert Leckey on Friday. Margot Young wraps up on this question today:
MY: I’m intrigued by Bruce’s metaphor More >
[Eric & Lola (3)] Robert Leckey: What they say v What they do
May 11th
Sonia: So, do you think that this case sets up a new approach to section 15 (again)? What’ significant about the way that the section 15 analyses are carried out, compared to previous cases and the divergent decisions in this case? What about the approach to the “line” between section 15 and section 1?
All the posts in our roundtable can be found here. We started on Monday with Bruce Ryder, and heard from Hester Lessard on Wednesday. Now, Robert Leckey:
RL: I share Hester’s doubts about the solidity of the cluster that purported to endorse Abella J.’s s. 15 discussion. But More >
[Eric & Lola (2)] Hester Lessard: Narrative Strategies of Smoke & Mirrors vs Dramatic Struggles
May 8th
Sonia: So, do you think that this case sets up a new approach to section 15 (again)? What’ significant about the way that the section 15 analyses are carried out, compared to previous cases and the divergent decisions in this case? What about the approach to the “line” between section 15 and section 1?
All the posts in our roundtable can be found here.
HL: Alas, I think I am the one who could use a session on the couch. Tracing the gyrations contained in the Quebec v. A decision has left me dizzy. Here is how I think it spins out.
Lebel J. More >
[Eric & Lola (1)] Bruce Ryder: Doctrinal Plasticity, continued
May 7th
Sonia: So, do you think that this case sets up a new approach to section 15 (again)? What’ significant about the way that the section 15 analyses are carried out, compared to previous cases and the divergent decisions in this case? What about the approach to the “line” between section 15 and section 1?
BR: I see Quebec v A as the third installment of the Court’s efforts to revise its own recent jurisprudence to reduce the burdens on equality claimants. In Kapp, the Court jettisoned the human dignity test from Law. In Withler, it rejected the mirror comparator group requirement put More >
Eric v Lola: an online roundtable
May 2nd
We’re excited to introduce the first IFLS roundtable, designed to make a space for legal scholars to have important & timely conversations without the formality of peer review, yet still allow them more control over content than direct engagement with traditional media often does. Hope you enjoy it!
When the decision in Eric v Lola, properly known as Quebec (Attorney General) v. A, 2013 SCC 5 came out January 25, 2013, it gave all those interested in family law, equality law, the Supreme Court of Canada, and even lifestyles of the rich and famous something to dive into. “A” had challenged More >
