Manitoba’s civil Queen’s Bench Rules are undergoing a significant amendment effective January 1, 2018. As noted in Chief Justice Joyal’s practice direction issued on November 8, 2017, the new rules and practices involve four major changes:
Judicial involvement in managing cases;
Judicially assisted dispute resolution (JADR); and
If you rely on the print looseleaf edition of the rules, Prof. Busby’s Manitoba Queen’s Bench Rules Annotated, make sure you check Manitoba Law’s website for an up-to-date version until the print edition is updated.
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.
If you’re a member of the Law Society of Manitoba, there is now even more content available for you behind the Member’s Portal. Under “Library Resources”, in addition to Heinonline.org, and Rangefindr.ca, we’ve added full Irwin Law collection, including the series, “Essentials of Canadian Law“.
Now you can have seamless access to authoritative secondary sources no matter where you live. However, you will have to remember your LSM username and password.
If you have any trouble accessing the site, please contact us at the Great Library.
The Government of Manitoba has issued the following proclamations:
The Legislative Security Act (whole act), S.M. 2017, c. 17. In force effective October 7, 2017.
This Act deals with security in the legislative precinct, which is the area that covers the Legislative Building and the grounds around the Legislative Building.
The Speaker of the Assembly has ultimate responsibility for security for the Legislative Assembly. The Speaker and the Minister of Justice are to enter into an arrangement respecting the provision of security in the legislative precinct. This arrangement must establish a process for selecting a director of legislative security. The director of legislative security is responsible for providing direction to legislative security officers who will provide security services in the legislative precinct.
Security officers may screen people entering the Legislative Building for weapons. A person who is not authorized to possess a weapon in the Legislative Building may be denied entry and have their weapon seized. Security officers may evict a person from the legislative precinct if the person engages in conduct that threatens safety in the legislative precinct or interferes with the operation of the Assembly.
Amendments are made to The Drivers and Vehicles Act to authorize the Registrar of Motor Vehicles to disclose certain vehicle licensing records to a legislative security officer.
The Fatality Inquiries Amendment Act (whole act), S.M. 2017, c. 15. In force effective November 1, 2017.
The Fatality Inquiries Act requires the reporting of sudden or unexpected deaths and deaths that occur in specified circumstances. An inquiry must be conducted into all reported deaths. A medical examiner must conduct an investigation into a death if the inquiry raises questions about the manner or cause of death. The chief medical examiner may arrange for a judicial inquest to be held to examine the circumstances of a death and make recommendations to prevent deaths in the future.
Inquiries and investigations
This Act clarifies the roles of investigators and medical examiners; specifies who has responsibility for taking control of a body that is the subject of an inquiry; and authorizes inquiries into deaths of Manitoba residents that occur outside Manitoba.
Amendments in this Act clarify when an inquest into a death is to be held. An inquest must be held if a person died as the result of the use of force by a peace officer. There is a presumption that an inquest is to be held if a person dies while in custody or while residing in specified provincial facilities. However, an inquest is not required in such cases if the death was due to natural causes and was not preventable or if there was no connection between the death and the supervision or care provided to the deceased. The chief medical examiner is not required to arrange for an inquest in specified situations.
The manner in which an inquest is called is updated. The amendments clarify the roles of the judge presiding at an inquest and counsel for the inquest. The ability of the Minister of Justice to call an inquest or have an active role in relation to matters under the Act is removed.
Several provisions are rewritten or reorganized to improve readability. Outdated provisions are repealed. Consequential amendments are made to The Vital Statistics Act.
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.