The Canadian Law Blog Awards, or Clawbies, have opened for 2018! What? You’re not familiar with a Clawbie? How can that be? They’ve been around for 13 years!
The Clawbies are an opportunity to celebrate law-related publications. While focussed on the written word, they also include podcasts and other forms of media. If there’s something you listen or read regularly that you think should be recognized, be sure to tweet about it with the hashtag #clawbie2018.
My legal information sources have definitely dwindled lately. Whether it’s an abundance of great content or a lack of time to absorb it, I’ve restricted myself to the tried and true this year. I love The Docket with Michael Spratt and Emilie Taman, for thoughtful opinions from the criminal defence bar (plus they make me laugh a lot). I’ve started listening to Stereo Decisis (always important to come up with a great name first!) with Robert Danay, Oliver Pulleyblank and Hilary Young. I think this qualifies as the only podcast with a regular cast from both coasts. They seem willing to talk about just about anything (witness the episode “The Beverley Bralette Edition”).
The two blogs I regularly read were both Clawbie winners last year. Legal Sourcery, from the Law Society of Saskatchewan Library, is an amazing source of ideas on everything from how to improve access to justice to what’s going on in legal news in Saskatchewan. We try to emulate their productivity but they have way more resources than we have! O’Faolain, which I suspect is an Irish word meaning something profound (or maybe profane), David Whelan’s personal blog, offers opinions on legal technology, knowledge management and planning for law libraries. Sometimes I feel like he’s a mind reader, as I’ll be thinking about a particular topic and then I’ll discover he’s just written something on it.
While I’m sticking with my old favourites, I’m sure other #clawbie2018 nominators will suggest some new titles to spruce up my stream for next year.
If you are a member of the Law Society of Manitoba, and would like a copy of any of the decisions from the digest please contact the library and we will be happy to provide those for you.
Provincial government offices will be closed for the full day on Monday, December 24, 2018. In light of this closure, all Court of Queen’s Bench Registry offices in Manitoba will be closed on December 24, 2018 and reopen on Thursday December 27, 2018.
Documents subject to a filing deadline of December 24, 2018 will now be calculated to have a filing deadline of December 27, 2018.
Please note that parties must commence legal proceedings within specified limitation periods and that this notice does not change limitation deadlines.
The Chief Justice of the Court of Queen’s Bench has issued the following practice direction regarding pre-trial briefs in civil actions:
When the Queen’s Bench Rules were most recently amended, the requirement to file a responding pre-trial brief was changed to the following:
Responding pre-trial brief
50.02(6) Any party to the action that wishes to file a responding pre-trial brief at the first pre-trial conference must file the brief with the court and serve it on all other parties at least seven days before the pre-trial conference.
The impetus for this amendment was to reconcile the issue of the responding party filing a pre-trial brief with the introduction of the screening function provided in Rule 50.04, wherein it was considered disproportionate to require the filing of a responding pre-trial brief if it was the responding party’s position that the pre-trial conference ought not to proceed. There has been an increasing number of pre-trial conferences where there is no suggestion that the pre-trial conference ought not to proceed, but the responding party has not filed a responding pre-trial brief on the basis of Rule 50.02(6). It was always anticipated that prudent practice would dictate that where an action is properly at a pre-trial conference, the responding party would file a pre-trial brief.
Given the potential disruption to the pre-trial conference process of not having responding pre-trial briefs, pending review of a related rule amendment by the Statutory Rules Committee, it is now directed that the responding party to a scheduled pre-trial conference file a pre-trial brief with the court and serve it on all other parties at least seven days before the pre-trial conference. Where it is the responding party’s position that the pre-trial conference ought not to proceed, the responding party, in the pre-trial brief, may indicate this position, along with its reasons. Where the responding party does not object to the pre-trial conference proceeding, the responding party’s brief must respond to the pre-trial brief of the party who sought the pre-trial conference, 2 including a response to the statement of the factual and legal issues in the action and the estimated duration of the trial. The responding party’s pre-trial brief should also address any pre-trial orders or directions that may be sought from the pre-trial judge.
Coming into effect
This Practice Direction comes into effect immediately.
The Manitoba Law Library would like to acknowledge with gratitude that we are situated on Treaty One Territory, the traditional lands of the Anishinaabe, Cree and Dakota peoples, and the homeland of the Métis Nation.
Great LEXpectations RSS Feed