News

• Heinonline changes  – The online library resource for historical canadian statutes, legal journals, and law texts is updating it’s lout with a new welcome page, and database updates.

• CanLII’s New and Improved Interface – another popular databse it updating it’s layout with an improved layout to assist with research.

• Manitoba to have independent seniors advocate (Law360 Canada Article)

• When you’re in a trade war, Canadian contract law matters (Law360 Canada Article)
• CPD Lexis+ online training session – Our last training session will take place on Wednesday April 23 at 2:30pm. Email library@lawsociety.mb.ca to sign up.

Rangefindr

• A database to help lawyers find criminal sentencing ranges in seconds instead of hours. Click a few tags that describe the kinds of cases you’re looking for (like “assault,” “first offender,” and “emphasizes rehabilitation”) and Rangefindr tells you what kind of sentences were imposed in those cases. One more click and you can review the judgments themselves.

vLex

• Canadian, American, and U.K. caselaw and commentary. Canadian content is provided by the former Maritime Law Book’s national reporting series, including its extensive indexing system, with new caselaw continuing to be added and edited. U.S. content includes federal and state caselaw going back to at least the 1930’s; legislation includes archived versions of the U.S. Code since 2000; a negative citatory system provided in partnership with Casemaker.
• Contains the full Irwin Law “Essentials of Canadian Law” series as well as a curated collection of key public policy documents of lasting reference value from Canadian governments, think tanks, academic centres and advocacy groups.
• Emond Publications Criminal Law Series, authored by both defence and Crown counsel, anchored by the expertise of general editors Brian H. Greenspan and Justice Vincenzo Rondinelli. Currently 12 titles have been released, including Charter Remedies in Criminal Cases, Digital Evidence, Indigenous People and the Criminal Justice System, and Prosecuting and Defending Offences against Children.

HeinOnline

• Extensive selection of Canadian, U.S. and U.K. legal journals and legislative materials. We subscribe to the Canadian Core Package and The American Law Institute Library.

Feature Article of the Month

This feature presents some of the interesting queries we receive, and highlights how we can direct you towards the appropriate resources.

“Jarndyce and Jarndyce drones on. This scarecrow of a suit has, in course of time, become so complicated that no man alive knows what it means. The parties to it understand it least, but it has been observed that no two Chancery lawyers can talk about it for five minutes without coming to a total disagreement as to all the premises.”

Charles Dickens, Bleak House

The unending case described in Charles Dickens “Bleak House” may be fictional, but it was based upon at least one real case. In 1798, William Jennens, considered Britain’s richest man at the time, died without signing a will. As the story goes, William forgot his spectacles on the day that he was due to sign his will at his solicitor’s office, and so it remained unsigned. For over a century, the great Jennens inheritance was claimed, counter-claimed and disputed by relations and descendants, people named Jennens, Jennings, Jennins and other logical variations of the spelling. Various clubs were set up from anyone that thought they had a claim to the vast inheritance, with clubs set up around the world from ‘the US, the Cape Colony, India, Australia, Ireland, etc.’. The subsequent legal proceedings took over a century, from 1798 until 1915. Without reaching a conclusion, and with the legal costs exhausting the Jennens inheritance in the process.

You can read more about the case with the article by Patrick Polden, “Stranger Than Fiction – The Jennens Inheritance in Fact and Fiction Part I: The Jennens Fortune in the Courts” (2003) 32:3 Comm L World Rev 211., available on Heinonline, which provides an in-depth examination that “throws light on a seldom explored species of legal proceeding, which had an international dimension, and the ways it was promoted and financed. It also highlights the acute difficulties experienced by claimants and their adversaries in furnishing legally admissible and conclusive evidence of identities and relationships before the implementation of the Marriage Act 1836 and the Registration Act 1837. Gaps and defects in the older sources encouraged the pursuit of optimistic claims and ensured that, in those cases which reached the courts, their resolution would be lengthy, costly and not always satisfactory. And when the law deployed the blunt instrument of limitation periods to curtail proceedings, that in turn led the more determined claimants to muddy the waters with allegations of fraud.”

Latest Current Awareness

Journals

Manitoba Law Library subscribes to a number of legal journals in print and digital. See below for the latest issues of popular titles. Members can request copies of articles under fair dealing guidelines by emailing library@lawsociety.mb.ca

Court Notices & Practice Directions

Federal Court

Notices

• • • • Delays in processing documents – Update March 18, 2025

Provincial Court

Notices

• • • • March 28, 2025 – DCD Docket
      • March 28, 2025 – Sioux Valley Dakota Nation
      • March 25, 2025 – Revised Pre Trial Coordination Protocols
        • link to Protocols

New Library Resources

New Print Titles

Book Reviews

Review taken from the Canadian Law Library Review, Vol. 50, Issue 1

Constitutionalising Social Media. Edited by Edoardo Celeste, Amélie Heldt & Clara Iglesias Keller.
New York: Bloomsbury, 2022. 352 p. Includes bibliographic references and index. ISBN 9781509953707 (hardcover) $175.50; ISBN 9781509953745 (softcover) $86.50; ISBN 9781509953714 (ePUB) $77.85; ISBN 9781509953721 (PDF) $77.85.

Reviewed By
Kyla McCallum
Student Librarian
University of British Columbia

“Constitutionalising Social Media is an anthology of essays on fundamental rights in the era of social media platforms. It comprises four parts and includes an extensive index, making it an invaluable resource for expert readers seeking specific information…

Constitutionalising Social Media is a valuable contribution to the scholarship on fundamental rights in our increasingly networked world. This book is part of a rapidly growing research field, as demonstrated by the establishment of the Digital Constitutionalism Network in 2019 and recent related publications. Readers familiar with Digital and Social Media Regulation: A Comparative Perspective of the US and Europe (Palgrave Macmillan, 2021) will appreciate this collection’s inclusion of cases from beyond the Western context. Additionally, those who enjoyed Social Media, Fundamental Rights and Courts: A European Perspective (Routledge, 2023) will find this current text to be complementary, particularly in its examination of relevant legislation.”

Click here for the full review

Events

Upcoming Events

Substantive Law

Civil Litigation

7602678 Manitoba Ltd v 6399500 Manitoba Ltd, 2025 MBCA 24: Discussion of the doctrine of abuse of process, citing Solomon v Smith, 1987 CanLII 117 (MBCA) and MRF v KD, 2005 MBCA 58. Mootness was also discussed, looking at Borowski v Canada (Attorney General), [1989] 1 SCR 342 at 353,1989 CanLII 123 (SCC) cited with approval in Gateway Bible Baptist Church v Manitoba, 2023 MBCA 56 at para. 21. 

D’Saint v. Manitoba (The Office of the Commissioner), 2025 MBKB 42: Applicant requests that removal of The Public Guardian and Trustee of Manitoba (PGT) as the Substitute Decision Maker (SDM) for her adult daughter. Due in part to her high support needs, the daughter has spent most of her life residing in a specialized care facility. The court references Danyleyko v. Manitoba (Vulnerable Persons’ Commissioner), 2000 MBQB 200 throughout the decision. The court is sympathetic to the situation of the applicant and orders a decision prohibiting unsupervised visits between the applicant and her daughter to be reviewed. PGT remains SDM.

Winnipeg Equine Centre Inc. v. Dolinski et al., 2025 MBKB 41: Dismissal of defendants motion for security of costs. Rempel, J. cites Gray et al. v. Webster et al., 1998 CanLII 6168 (MB CA), as the leading authority. At para. 38 Rempel, J. states, “Waiting for over six years from the close of pleadings and amendments thereto to bring the motion, after both documentary and oral discovery had already been undertaken, bears all the hallmarks of a tactical strike in this litigation and not a protective measure for the Owner.”

Winnipeg Condominium Corporation No. 913 v. Creek Bend Project Inc. et al., 2025 MBKB 40: Plaintiff brought application under s. 14 of The Limitations of Actions Act in 2022 against defendant and third parties. The third parties opposed the application. Plaintiff abandoned application against them, releasing the third parties from liability for the matters and damages at issue in the action. Defendant took no position. Plaintiff went ahead with action against defendant. Third parties seek summary judgment on the basis that the third-party claim against them by defendant was barred as the statutory limitation period had expired and the court was unable to waive the limitation period. Comments made on when it is appropriate to apply to strike or expunge portions of affidavits. B. (I.) v. Canada (Attorney General), 2001 SKQB 243 cited in granting summary judgement in favour of third parties.

Criminal Law

R v Pan, 2025 SCC 12:

“Per Wagner C.J. and Côté, Rowe, Kasirer, Jamal, O’Bonsawin and Moreau JJ.: As ordered by the Court of Appeal, a new trial is necessary for all accused on the first degree murder count. The lesser included offences of second degree murder and manslaughter had an air of reality and the jury should have been permitted to consider them. However, the trial judge’s error in failing to leave the included offences with the jury for the first degree murder count did not taint the attempted murder convictions and therefore a new trial is not warranted on that count. Regarding the other grounds, there was no reversible error in the trial judge’s approach to the slide show, and the allegations of juror bias and the instructions to the jury on propensity evidence provide no basis for interfering with the convictions.”

“Per Karakatsanis and Martin JJ. (dissenting on the appeal): The appeal should be allowed and the convictions for first degree murder should be restored. There are no grounds to interfere with the trial judge’s conclusion that the jury should not have been instructed on the lesser included offences of second degree murder or manslaughter regarding the killing of the mother, as there was no air of reality to these possible verdicts. As for the cross‑appeals, there is agreement with the majority that they should be dismissed.”

R v Dunsford, 2025 MBKB 43: Accused was charged with second-degree murder for killing his mother. Crown accepted guilty plea to manslaughter. Offense occurred while on probation from a different manslaughter charge, having completed a jail sentence for beating his brother to death. Accused has Gladue factors and major alcohol addiction, however, moral culpability remains very high. Crown moved for delayed parole under s. 743.6 of the Criminal Code. The court followed instructions in R. v. Zinck, 2003 SCC 6, and declined to delay parole. Accused sentenced to 18 years incarceration, less time served.

R v Thompson, 2025 MBKB 37: Accused pled guilty to manslaughter. The deceased was in worked as a First Nations Safety Officer and was generally considered to be a pillar of the community. Aggravating circumstances include statutorily aggravating factor pursuant to s. 718.2(a)(ii) and s. 718.2(a)(iii.1) of the Criminal Code. Accused sentenced to 10 years incarceration less time in custody.

R v Clement, 2025 MBPC 26: Sentencing decision. Accused was found guilty of sexual assault. Accused has Gladue factors and no previous record; he struggles with alcohol abuse and mental health issues. Accused was sentenced to three years of incarceration.

R v Welch, 2025 MBPC 16: Accused pleaded guilty to assault and multiple firearm charges. Accused was under a weapons prohibition due to a prior charge. Both Crown and defense filed R v Kennedy 2016 MBCA 5 among caselaw to be considered. Following R. v Coutu, 2020 MBCA 106, it was determined that the s. 117.01 offenses should be served consecutively to the other charges. Factoring in enhanced custody credits, accused will serve 705 days.

Sieklicki v Kostecki, 2025 MBPC 24: Private citizen seeking to initiate criminal proceeding. Ex parte application by applicant for process to issue against accused in respect of an alleged offence under s. 266 of the Criminal Code. Discussion of the place and purpose of private prosecution. Application for process granted. Crown encouraged to intervene.

R v Houle, 2025 MBPC 20: Accused is charged with breaking into a residence while wearing a disguise and committing robbery, while armed with an axe. The two victims both identified the offender as the accused, their cousin, who neither has seen in over a decade. At issue: if the Crown has proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused is the offender. Discussion of recognition identification and R. v. Sutherland, 2018 MBQB 195. The Court was left with reasonable doubt. Accused acquitted.

R v Severight, 2025 MBPC 19: Accused pleaded guilty to dangerous driving cause death offence and leaving the scene of a traffic accident fatality. Accused, an inexperienced driver with a learner’s licence, was going 159 kmph on a residential street when he hit the deceased. Accused has no prior criminal or driving record. He is an indigenous man who grew up as a ward of CPS. The court referenced the majority in R v Lacasse, 2015 SCC 64 when discussing the impact on the deceased’s family and community and the interplay of youth with dangerous driving. Accused sentenced to three years incarceration, less time served, and ancillary orders.

Family Law

A.S. v. K.S., 2025 MBKB 38: “Paper hearing” to deal with issues of child support arrears. Principles in D.B.S. v. S.R.G., 2006 SCC 37  were considered.

Wills, Trusts, and Estates

Re Simmons Estate; Simmons v. Sinclair et al., 2025 MBKB 45: A few days prior to his death in 2023, the deceased made a will that favoured one of the respondents, a departure from a 1994 will in which the applicant was sole inheritor. Applicant challenged the validity of the 2023 will. Minimal evidentiary threshold to justify production in estate litigation was discussed, citing Neuberger v. York, 2016 ONCA 191,  Seepa v. Seepa, 2017 ONSC 5368, and Re Peter Estate; Wickstead v. Martens et al., 2024 MBKB 94.

Legislation

Federal

Recent Votes

See here for the latest activity.

Provincial

Recent Activity

Current Bills    |    Bill Status

New Regulations