Once again, more legal resources behind the Law Society of Manitoba’s Member’s Portal! My personal mission is to step beyond the Perimeter to provide service and value to those members who live and work outside of Winnipeg. From the press release:
vLex Canada, the only place to research enriched Canadian case law alongside a growing collection of law journals, secondary sources and a dozen core legal texts. A service of Compass, the successor to Maritime Law Book, vLex Canada is home to the venerable Manitoba Reports (2d), and it supports topic-based Canadian case law browsing and search using the MLB Key Number System across over 100 topics and tens of thousands of sub-topics.
vLex US provides comprehensive case law, statutes and regulations at both the federal and state level, as well as full-text access to over 290 secondary legal sources.
If you would like training on these or any of the other e-products available, please contact us and we will be happy to set up a webinar.
I think this will be the end of new electronic content for a little while. I’ll be reviewing analytics to determine the uptake of all these new resources, so please try them out.
The Manitoba Court of Appeal recently ruled on the right of a child protection agency to request the personal information associated with a subscriber to an IP address.
Child and Family All Nations Coordinated Response Network (ANCR) was contacted by the Winnipeg Police Service (WPS) in February, 2016 who were in turn, informed by Interpol that a convicted sex offender in the United Kingdom may have had contact with someone they believed to be a child in 2012. ANCR asked Shaw Communications to identify the owner of the IP address. Shaw refused without a court order.
The application was first taken up with a Master, who did not have jurisdiction to hear an application as opposed to a motion, and then it went to a judge, who dismissed it, concluding that she did not have the jurisdiction to make the order either.
This decision is significant for its analysis of the interpretation of a statute.
 ANCR brought its application pursuant to the QB Rules for a determination of rights based upon the interpretation of the CFS Act and regulations. Rule 14.05(2)(c)(iv) of the QB Rules allows for the determination of rights that depend on the interpretation of any document referred to in the rule, in this case, a statute. The rule does not create jurisdiction, but provides a means to determine the nature and extent, if any,
of jurisdiction that already exists.
Steel, J.A. dismissed the application based on the documentation and evidence, while noting that the child protection agency did indeed have the jurisdiction to make such a request. Also of significance are Beard, J.A.’s concurring reasons.
With the high cost of subscription caselaw databases, we’re always looking for authoritative free sources. The Free Law Project is a California non-profit public benefit corporation whose mission is to “provide free, public, and permanent access to primary legal materials on the Internet”. Working with PACER (Public Access to Court Electronic Records) they have collected every free order and opinion available on PACER and published them on an easy-to-use site called CourtListener.
PACER is similar to our Court Registry. It hosts case file documents and docket information for all district, bankruptcy and appellate courts. While it’s not free, it is very reasonably priced. If you’re looking for document information for a U.S. decision, we have an account with PACER and can help you find it.
CourtListener and Google Scholar should be of benefit to those firms who can’t justify subscribing to a U.S. database.