News

• New Research feature: CanLII Search+: A research assistant powered by artificial intelligence. “This powerful tool lets you describe your research needs in your own words. CanLII Search+ will suggest a complex Boolean query that will generate a curated selection of relevant results from the CanLII database.” See video preview.
  • le 22 avril | midi à 13h – Astuces et outils pour une recherche juridique efficace sur CanLII
  • April 23, 2026 | 12:00 – 1:00 p.m – Navigating CanLII: Tips and Tools for Efficient Legal Research
• Law360: Winnipeg’s bail compliance unit fully operational: Manitoba government
• CBC: Brandon inmate sues former defence lawyer who was suspended from practising law– “Lawyer ‘performed no meaningful legal work,’ inmate’s lawsuit alleges”
• LexisNexis Says Data Breach Has Been Contained; Hackers Claim Access to Government and Law Firm User Data
• SLAW: Designing Courthouse Libraries That Truly Work

Question of the Month

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

What kind of resources do you have for practice management?

We have a number of titles to help with your legal practice in a wide range of topics including; practice management, professional liability, conflicts of interest, and legal research;

• Conflicts of Interest: Principles For The Legal Profession – “A practical guide that analyzes conflict of interest dilemmas. This service is designed as a handbook and covers all major legal areas regarding conflicts of interest. Reflecting on the author’s experience, this is an unrivalled source of information.
• Canadian legal practice : A Guide For The 21st Century – “Canadian Legal Practice helps you manage both day-to-day matters and situations outside your core practice area. “
• Lawyers’ professional liability – “This essential resource offers practical guidance for avoiding legal malpractice claims and is particularly relevant for any lawyer involved in adjudicating, litigating or settling legal malpractice suits.”
• Writing for the court – ” writing, provides quick and ready guidance on preparing effective and succinct briefs, clear written advocacy, and written judgments. Written in an informal and highly readable style, the book provides invaluable insight on proper sentence and paragraph structure, style, legal reasoning, among other topics.
• Lawyers And Ethics: Professional Responsibility And Discipline – “practical text dealing with the issues of professional responsibility regularly confronting lawyers in Canada in every area of practice. It is a valuable reference for the practising lawyer and the student, as it relates the rules of professional conduct to daily practice. Specific types of ethical problems arising in the major areas of practice are identified, and insightful, practical solutions presented.”
• Decoding Canadian legal research, writing and conventions – ” an essential resource for internationally trained lawyers seeking to work in Canada. It bridges common gaps in legal research and writing knowledge arising from foreign legal education and legal systems.
• Point Made: How To Write Like The Nation’s Top Advocates — 2nd Ed. – “Provides a strategic roadmap for practitioners on how best to formulate their motion or brief”
• Raindance II: a blueprint for growing your practice – “designed and written as a guide book for lawyers who want to learn and start to practice effective approaches to business development. It takes the reader through the creation of a business plan, which involves target-market research to completing an action plan to implementation of the same.”
• Law Is A Buyer’s Market : Building a Client-First Law Firm – “ Re-envisioning the purpose of firms and the role of lawyers, he has designed a transformative buyer-first law firm that rethinks the business model, culture, client service, competitiveness, profitability, growth strategies, diversity, and leadership of legal enterprises. When clients change their purchasing patterns, law firms need to change their approach. Law Is A Buyer’s Market will help you adapt to the new legal market and lead your firm into the future of law.”

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

Full list of Journal available here

New Journals available through Westlaw

Print Journals

Court Notices & Practice Directions

Provincial Court

Notices

• • • • Provincial Court Judge Advertisement – Winnipeg, Brandon, Portage la Prairie. Application Deadline: March 30, 2026
      • February 12, 2025 – Remote Appearances before a Judge – Province Wide

New Library Resources

New Digital Titles
(available in vLex behind the LSM Member Portal)

Book Reviews

Review taken from the Canadian Law Library Review, Vol. 50 Issue 3

Democracy, Protest and the Law: Defending a Democratic Right. By Michael Head. London, U.K.: Routledge, 2024. vii, 198 p. Includes index. ISBN 9780367608323 (hardcover) US$190.00; ISBN 9781003100652 (eBook) US$56.99.

Reviewed By
Krisandra Ivings
Manager, Monograph Description
Library and Archives Canada

“Head uses the U.K., U.S., and Australia to demonstrate how essential the freedom to protest is in democratic nations and to analyze how that freedom is being threatened. While his analysis does not include Canada, the countries he does focus on have reputations for being liberal democracies and share many similarities to Canada, the most important of which is the U.K.’s legal and democratic values. Head also includes several Canadian examples, such as commentary on the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the increase in Canadian anti-protest legislation; for example, the laws enacted after the Wet’suwet’en blockades protesting the development of pipelines that would pass through their unceded territory.

 …

One of the strongest points that Head makes at multiple times throughout the book is the hypocrisy of the state’s relationship to protest. This can be seen in the lip service that governments and politicians pay to the rights to protest, freedom of speech, and assembly, while simultaneously introducing measures that diminish these same rights. This is particularly interesting in the U.S. examples, which show the country’s increasing intolerance of civil disobedience despite its celebrating protests like the Boston Tea Party.”

Click here for the full review

Events

Upcoming Events

Substantive Law

Bankruptcy Law

Manulife Bank of Canada v 6393927 Manitoba Ltd, 2026 MBCA 18: Respondent motion to either strike the notice of appeal, or to cancel the automatic stay of the receivership order mandated under section 195 of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act upon filing the notice of appeal. Justice Beard recognized issues of the jurisdiction of a single judge in chambers, citing PricewaterhouseCoopers Inc v Ramdath, 2018 MBCA 41 and Klippenstein v Manitoba Ombudsman, 2015 MBCA 15. Other issues include the right to represent a corporation (2272539 Manitoba Ltd v Manitoba (Liquor Control Commission), 1996 CanLII 12428 (MBCA)), and the circumstances under which a BIA s. 195 stay can be varied or cancelled (Grillone (Re), 2023 ONCA 844).

Civil Litigation

Winnipeg Condominium Corporation No 881 v. T & T Properties Inc, 2026 MBCA 16: Respondent appeals two decisions of the application judge granting leave to the applicant to commence a construction litigation action against the respondents. The application was made in 2020, pursuant to section 14(1) of The Limitation of Actions Act. Issues include timing of knowledge of material facts; Limitation periods and judicial discretion under the LAA. The standard of review for discretionary decisions was described in Olford et al v. Springwood Homes Inc, 2019 MBCA 2 (at para 9) and questions of law are subject to a standard of correctness (see Sterling Parkway Residences Inc v. Gypsum Drywall Interiors Ltd, 2024 MBCA 46). Appeal dismissed.

College of Registered Nurses of Manitoba v. Hancock, 2026 MBCA 15: Unsuccessful appeal of a vexatious litigant order granted by a chambers judge of this Court, per section 31.1(1) of The Court of Appeal Act, CCSM c C240.

Values Financial Services Inc. v. Imiefoh et al., 2026 MBKB 28: Defendants made a consumer proposal under s. 50 of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, which was accepted and triggered a statutory stay of proceedings under s. 69.1(1) of the Act. Secured creditors are not subject to the stay. That issue turns on the proper interpretation of the parties’ contract. Bock, J. cited Sattva Capital Corp. v. Creston Moly Corp., 2014 SCC 53 in recognizing the importance and limitations of consideration of the surrounding circumstances as part of the interpretive process. The rule of contra proferentem was invoked to resolve the issue of ambiguity in the contracts (Dinney v. Great-West Life Assurance Co. et al., 2009 MBCA 29).

Lewsey et al. v. Revera Inc. et al., 2026 MBKB 18: Decision certifying a class-action lawsuit per s.4 of The Class Proceedings Act.  Claims of negligence, breach of fiduciary duty and breaches of contract regarding the standard required to prevent the spread of COVID-19 during the outbreak in the care home. Pro-Sys Consultants Ltd. v. Microsoft Corporation, 2013 SCC 57 outlines the certification requirements. Brief discussion of circular definitions referencing the merits of the claim or subjective characteristics (Chadha v. Bayer Inc., 2003 CanLII 35843 (ON CA)). Plaintiffs submit the proposed common issues are in keeping with those that were certified in the Ontario long-term care home class proceedings of Pugliese v. Chartwell, 2024 ONSC 1135 and Head v. 859530 Ontario Inc., 2025 ONSC 4817.

Quebec (Attorney General) v. Kanyinda, 2026 SCC 7: Held (Côté J. dissenting): The appeal should be allowed in part.

“Per Karakatsanis, Martin, Kasirer, Jamal, O’Bonsawin and Moreau JJ.: Section 3 of the [Reduced Contribution Regulation] infringes s. 15(1) of the Charter because it discriminates against women refugee claimants based on sex. It does so in a way that cannot be saved by s. 1. There is agreement with the Court of Appeal that the appropriate remedy is reading in the category of refugee claimants to s. 3 of the RCR; however, the Court of Appeal erred by reading in a work permit as a condition of eligibility. Rather, s. 3 of the RCR should be read as including, as eligible for the subsidized daycare rate, parents residing in Quebec who are refugee claimants.”

 

“Per Rowe J.: There is agreement with the majority in the result. There is agreement with the majority that s. 3 of the RCR is discriminatory on the basis of sex, and thus violates s. 15 of the Charter, and that the infringement is not justified under s. 1. With respect to s. 1, there is agreement with the majority’s conclusion, but for different reasons. Section 3 of the RCR pursues a pressing and substantial objective; the limit on the s. 15 right is rationally connected to the objective, and the impugned provision is minimally impairing.  […] Section 15 does not impose obligations on governments to create programs to provide benefits, but it does impose an obligation on governments to remedy discriminatory underinclusion when it does choose to provide benefits.”

 

“Per Wagner C.J.: Section 3 of the RCR infringes s. 15(1) of the Charter, but direct discrimination based on refugee claimant status is the main pathway to decide this appeal. By excluding refugee claimants, s. 3 of the RCR creates a distinction based on this analogous ground. This distinction is discriminatory, because it denies a benefit in a manner that has the effect of reinforcing, perpetuating or exacerbating a disadvantage suffered by refugee claimants. It has not been shown that the infringement is justified under s. 1. In the circumstances, the appropriate constitutional remedy is to read refugee claimants into s. 3 of the RCR as a ninth category of eligible parents.
     Section 15 of the Charter protects refugee claimant status as an analogous ground.”

 

“Per Côté J. (dissenting): The appeal should be allowed, the judgments of the courts below set aside and K’s application for judicial review dismissed. The RCR does not create a distinction based on the ground of sex, but rather on the ground of refugee claimant status. However, the distinction is a lawful one because refugee claimant status cannot be recognized as a new analogous ground. Consequently, there is no infringement of the right to equality protected by s. 15 of the Charter.”

Taylor v. Newfoundland and Labrador, 2026 SCC 5: Held (Wagner C.J. and Rowe, Kasirer and Jamal JJ. dissenting in part)

“Per Karakatsanis, Côté, Martin, O’Bonsawin and Moreau JJ.: Despite its mootness, this important appeal should be decided on its merits. Section 6 of the Charter guarantees a right to move freely within Canada, including across provincial borders, to both citizens and permanent residents, in s. 6(1) and (2). Generally, any law that limits, in a non‑fleeting or non‑trivial fashion, the ability of citizens or permanent residents to move within Canada, or which makes such movement contingent on state authorization, will infringe s. 6. Newfoundland and Labrador’s travel restrictions did just that. However, s. 6, like all Charter rights and freedoms, is subject to reasonable limits, including those necessary to protect public safety, health, or the rights of others. The travel restrictions pass scrutiny under the Oakes test and were justified under s. 1 of the Charter, because this was a grave emergency.”

 

Wagner C.J. and Kasirer and Jamal JJ.: “In our respectful view, however, Ms. Taylor’s mobility right under s. 6(2)(a) of the Charter was infringed when she was prevented from attending her mother’s burial in Newfoundland and Labrador, not her rights under s. 6(1). This reflects a settled understanding that s. 6(1) protects international mobility and that s. 6(2) protects interprovincial mobility. There is a broad scholarly consensus that s. 6(1) only protects rights related to international mobility for Canadian citizens, while s. 6(2) protects interprovincial mobility within all of Canada for both citizens and permanent residents[.]”

 

Rowe J.: “As to the s. 1 analysis, I would add only that Newfoundland is an island and that access to Labrador, even though it forms part of the mainland of Canada, is largely by sea or air since overland access is limited. Thus, the Province’s efforts to maintain a “cordon sanitaire” had a geographic basis that does not exist in most parts of the country.
I depart from my colleagues in their analysis of s. 6 of the Charter. Applying the purposive approach as set out by Dickson J., as he then was, in R. v. Big M Drug Mart Ltd., 1985 CanLII 69 (SCC), [1985] 1 S.C.R. 295, I conclude that interprovincial travel simpliciter is protected by s. 6(1) but not by s. 6(2)(a).”

Criminal Law

R v. OCFG (No 2), 2026 MBCA 12: Sentencing decision from a successful Crown appeal of the Trial Judge’s sentence (R v. OCFG (No 1), 2025 MBCA 27). The charges are one count of sexual assault and one count of assault, both involving intimate partner abuse. The original sentence was a cumulative 6 month CSO followed by 6 months supervised probation. The varied sentence after time served is 60 months incarceration. Discussion of withdrawn consent at paras. 14-17.

R v. Carvajal, 2026 MBCA 14: Accused appealed his convictions on three counts of possessing controlled substances for the purpose of trafficking and one count of possession of property obtained by crime under $5,000 (the proceeds offence). The Crown intended to ender a stay of proceedings on the proceeds offence, but it was never recorded in the record. At para. 6, “In our view, this procedural irregularity is fully addressed by section 686(1)(b)(iv) of the Code. As was explained in R v. Esseghaier, 2021 SCC 9, “our law does not demand procedurally perfect justice, but fundamentally fair justice” (at para 10, citing with approval R v. O’Connor, 1995 CanLII 51 at para 193 (SCC)). The trial court in the present case had jurisdiction over all the offences in question and, in our opinion, the accused suffered no prejudice from this procedural irregularity.” The conviction for the proceeds offence was set aside, and the remainder of the appeal was dismissed.

R v. Becks, 2026 MBCA 13: Sentence appeal on the basis that the sentencing judge erred by relying on aggravating facts that were disputed and not proven by the Crown beyond a reasonable doubt, , contrary to s. 724(3) of the Criminal Code and the principles established in R v. Gardiner, 1982 CanLII 30 (SCC). The Crown conceded that the sentencing judge erred in this way and the parties submitted a joint recommendation that each sentence be reduced by 120 days of custody. The court allowed the appeal and accepted the parties’ submission and varied the sentence.

R v. Campbell, 2026 MBKB 25: Reasons for a conviction of second degree murder where the Crown’s evidence was entirely circumstantial. The leading case on circumstantial evidence is R v.Villaroman,2016 SCC 33. Concerning post-offence conduct, from which the Crown argued inferences of guilt can be drawn, the Court cited R v. White, 1998 CanLII 789 (SCC) and noted that care needs to be taken with such evidence.

Family Law

NW v. GT, 2026 MBKB 26: Parenting order variation and issues of child-support and section 7 arears. The court cited Donovan v. Donovan, 2000 MBCA 80, concerning the issue of intentional underemployment or unemployment.

Franford v. Bogicĕvić, 2026 MBKB 19: Applicant father, alleges wrongful removal of the parties’ child and requests return of the child to Serbia pursuant to the provisions of the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. The Court used the two-step analysis outlined in Ludwig v. Ludwig, 2019 ONCA 680 to determine habitual residence of the child was in Serbia. The mother invoked Article 13(b) of the Hague Convention to claim an exception to returning the child. Finizio v. Scoppio-Finizio, 1999 CanLII 1722 (ON CA) and Ellis v. Wentzell-Ellis, 2010 ONCA 347 cited to establish the high threshold set out in Article 13(b). The standard of proof is the balance of probabilities (F.H. v. McDougall, 2008 SCC 53). The Article 13(b) exception was found to be met. The child is not to be returned to Serbia, and the application is dismissed.

Legislation

Federal

Recent Bill Activity

See here for the latest activity.

Provincial

The 3rd Session of the 43rd Legislature reconvened on Wednesday, March 4, 2026 at 1:30 p.m.

Introduced

Government Bills

Bill 4 The Constitutional Questions Amendment Act – “ The Lieutenant Governor in Council must seek the Court of Appeal’s opinion when a declaration under section 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms(the “notwithstanding clause”) is made in an Act of the Legislature.”

Bill 8  The Long-Bladed Weapon Control Amendment Act – “amended to expand the scope of the Act to cover pepper spray. Online retailers are now expressly subject to the Act.”

Bill 9 The Street Weapons Control Act – ” The Street Weapons Control Act is established. Street weapons include machetes, swords, axes and pepper spray. The possession of these weapons in public spaces in populated areas is prohibited, subject to specified exemptions. Police officers and other specified law enforcement officials may seize a prohibited street weapon.
The Act applies to a First Nation only if the First Nation decides to have the Act apply on its territory.”

Bill 10 The Employment Standards Code Amendment Act (Attachment Leave for Adoption and Surrogacy) – “An employee may take up to 16 weeks of unpaid leave if a child is placed or arrives into the employee’s care through adoption or surrogacy.”

Bill 11 The Employment Standards Code Amendment Act (Sick Notes for Employee Absences) – “Employment Standards Code is amended to limit when an employer may require a sick note from an employee who is absent from work due to injury or illness.”

Bill 14 The Public Interest Disclosure (Whistleblower Protection) Amendment Act – “The Public Interest Disclosure (Whistleblower Protection) Act is amended as follows.

• • The chief executive of a public body must act as the designated officer when a disclosure of alleged wrongdoing involves the designated officer or another senior official.
  • A disclosure involving the chief executive must be referred to the Ombudsman or, if the chief executive is a deputy minister, to the Clerk of the Executive Council.
  • An employee can make a disclosure despite any agreement to the contrary.
  • The circumstances in which reprisals against an employee are prohibited are expanded to include when the employee is suspected of making a disclosure, declines to participate in a wrongdoing or otherwise complies with the Act.
  • The burden of proving that a person did not take a reprisal against an employee is on the person who is alleged to have taken the reprisal. The Ombudsman may take appropriate steps to help resolve a reprisal complaint within a public body.
  • A public body’s annual report of the number of disclosures received must include a nil report when no disclosures are received.”

Bill 16 The Mental Health Amendment Act – “Physician assistants and clinical assistants authorized by the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Manitoba and nurse practitioners may conduct examinations and apply for involuntary psychiatric assessments. Other health professionals may also do so if authorized by regulation.”

Bill 17 The Adult Abuse Registry Amendment Act– “The Adult Abuse Registry Act is amended to streamline the Adult Abuse Registry Committee process while preserving procedural fairness. The committee must determine whether a person abused or neglected a specified adult after a single hearing. The person continues to have an opportunity to provide information to the committee.”

Bill 18 The Waste Reduction and Prevention Amendment Act (Strengthening Enforcement) – “The Waste Reduction and Prevention Act is amended to improve the administration of the Act and provide enhanced measures to enforce the Act.”

Bill 19 The Animal Care Amendment Act– “The Animal Care Act is amended as follows.

• • Unless exempted by regulation, a person is required to be licensed to sell or transfer ownership of pet animals. Licensing requirements for premises operated as a kennel or for breeding or retailing pets are repealed.
  • The standards governing the acceptable treatment of animals are clarified. Regulations concerning animal health and welfare may incorporate codes and standards published by recognized animal care and welfare organizations.
  • The procedure for court orders that restrict the number of animals that a person may own and the appeal of an order is clarified. Types of orders that the court may make are expanded.
  • The maximum fines that may be imposed for offences under the Act are increased from $10,000 to $20,000 for a first offence and from $20,000 to $100,000 for a subsequent offence. Terms of imprisonment are also increased.

Bill 29 The University of Winnipeg Amendment Act– “The University of Winnipeg Act is amended.

• • The size of the Board of Regents (the “board”) is reduced from 36 to 21 members.
  • A person may be a board member for up to nine consecutive years. After that, the person cannot serve again for three years.
  • The board must adopt a conflict of interest by-law for board members and may make by-laws governing in camera meetings.
  • The board must also make by-laws providing for an annual performance review of the university president. The president must be excluded from board or committee meetings when they are the subject of the deliberations.

Bill 30 The Intimate Partner Violence Death Review Committee Act – “A multidisciplinary committee is to review the circumstances of selected intimate partner violence deaths and make recommendations to prevent deaths in similar circumstances in the future.”

Bill 31 The Highway Traffic Amendment Act – “The Highway Traffic Act is amended to impose additional public safety measures related to impaired driving.”

Bill 33 The Planning Amendment and City of Winnipeg Charter Amendment Act– “The Planning Act and The City of Winnipeg Charter are amended.

• • The timelines and requirements for Municipal Board hearings, recommendations and reports for planning applications and appeals are clarified.
  • If a government authority or a planning authority objects to the adoption or amendment of a secondary plan or zoning by-law, the Municipal Board is required to hold a hearing, and the order made by the Board after the hearing is binding on the board or council.
  • The provisions that provide for costs in circumstances of unreasonable delay when a matter is before the Municipal Board are repealed.
  • Compensation is no longer payable for delays in issuing development permits.
  • Additional changes are made to The Planning Act 

Bill 35 The Adult Learning Centres Amendment Act – ” The Adult Learning Centres Act is amended.

• • A First Nation band council may operate an adult learning centre without having partnered with a recognized educational institution.
  • A union-operated training centre may operate a centre without a partner if it meets the conditions that apply to not-for-profit corporations and correctional facilities.
  • The annual report of an operator must contain audited financial statements for the most recent fiscal year.”

Private Bills

Bill 214 The Official Time Amendment Act, 2025 – “Currently, The Official Time Amendment Act comes into force on proclamation to discontinue the seasonal time change from daylight saving time. The commencement of that Act is amended so that it will come into force on March 14, 2027, instead.”

2nd Reading (links to Hansard)

Bill 3 The Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation Amendment Act

 Bill 4 The Constitutional Questions  Amendment Act

Bill 207 The Health System Governance and Accountability Amendment Act (Reporting When Timely Care Not Available)

Current Bills    |    Bill Status

New Regulations