The Canadian Legal Information Institutes’s (CanLII’s) secondary sources section now includes law reviews. As it is explained in the CanLII announcement, “Law reviews are often the only place a particular topic is discussed, and they often provide insight into the law for a particular jurisdiction where no one else does that make them invaluable for research.” Information on how to search law reviews, the law reviews that are currently available and how to recommend other law reviews to be included on CanLII is available here: https://blog.canlii.org/2018/03/23/%e2%98%80%ef%b8%8f-we-now-have-law-reviews-on-canlii-%e2%98%80%ef%b8%8f/.
(Photo credit: CanLII)
The Canadian Research Institute for Law and the Family (CRILF), in partnership with the Canadian Forum on Civil Justice (CFCJ) have published an exciting new report that examines the use of collaborative settlement processes, mediation, arbitration and litigation to resolve family law disputes.
The study provides valuable insights into the costs of the different dispute resolution processes, how long cases take to resolve, and lawyers’ perceptions of their efficacy and suitability for resolving different types of family law problems.
Read “An Evaluation of the Cost of Family Law Disputes: Measuring the Cost Implication of Various Dispute Resolution Methods” on the CFCJ website here and on the CRILF website here.
The Canadian Research Institute for Law and the Family (CRILF) has published two new reports.
The first report is the Record of Proceedings of Children’s Participation in Justice Processes: Finding the Best Ways Forward. This report is based on findings from a two-day national symposium, held in Calgary in September 2017, that brought together a multidisciplinary spectrum of leading stakeholders to share information and dialogue about how the voices of children and youth are heard, how their interests are protected and how their evidence is received in justice processes. The record contains the Program Guide, the PowerPoint slides presented at the conference, workshop scribes’ notes and presenters’ summaries of outcome, and a digest of the key themes and recommendations emerging from the workshops.
The Record of Proceedings can be downloaded on the CRILF website here.
The second report is Perceptions of Polyamory in Canada. This is the second of two reports published by the Institute on polyamory and polyamorous relationships. The earlier paper focused on the intersections between polyamorous relationships and family law in Canada’s common law jurisdictions. The new report takes a deeper dive into the data collected in the CRILF survey to look at the demographic characteristics of polyamorists, the composition of their families, their attitudes toward their relationships and their perceptions of how Canadians view polyamory and polyamorous relationships. The purpose of the study was to obtain a better understanding of the prevalence and nature of polyamorous relationships to inform the development of family justice policy and legislation. Recommendations are made with respect to law reform, public and professional education, and future research. This interesting and innovative research on the views and attitudes of Canadian polyamorists is the first of its kind.
Perceptions of Polyamory in Canada can be downloaded on the CRILF website here.
The details in this post were taken from information circulated by CRILF.
Researchers at the Canadian Forum on Civil Justice (CFCJ) have published three new Cost of Justice reports that explore some of the frequently overlooked consequences of experiencing serious civil and family justice problems in Canada. Beyond the out-of-pocket monetary costs of everyday legal problems, millions of Canadians experience physical and mental health problems, loss of employment and a loss of housing as a direct consequence of the legal problem(s) that they face. In addition, based on findings from the CFCJ’s national Cost of Justice in Canada survey, Canadians also reported that they access government-mandated social assistance as a result of one or more serious civil or family justice problems that they experienced. To read the latest CFCJ Cost of Justice reports, click on the hyperlinked titles below:
The most recent volume of the Windsor Yearbook of Access to Justice includes a collection of scholarly articles on the theme of: “Innovation and Access to Justice: Addressing the Challenge of a Diverse Justice Ecosystem”. This special issue was edited by the Winkler Institute for Dispute Resolution’s academic co-directors, Nicole Aylwin and Martha Simmons and is available for free online here: https://ojs.uwindsor.ca/ojs/leddy/index.php/WYAJ/index.
The Canadian Forum on Civil Justice (CFCJ) has published five new reports based on data from their Everyday Legal Problems and the Cost of Justice in Canada study. As part of this national study, over 3,000 people in Canada were surveyed about their attitudes towards and experiences with the justice system in Canada. Specifically, they were asked about their views on the Canadian justice system, the kinds of civil and family justice problems they experience, their methods of dealing with these problems, and the associated costs they incur to resolve them. The five new reports present survey data broken down according to the following respondent characteristics: “Age,” “Gender,” “Canadian Region,” “Education” and “Born in Canada”. The reports are published on the CFCJ’s “Cost of Justice” page and can be accessed by clicking on the hyperlinked titles below:
Born in Canada
The Canadian Research Institute for Law and the Family has just released a report entitled: “An International Review of Early Neutral Evaluation Programs and their Use in Family Law Disputes in Alberta.”
Generally speaking, early neutral evaluation programs are court-based programs that require the parties to a dispute to attend a neutral third party evaluator early on the life of a lawsuit. At these hearings, the parties present their positions in the case and receive the feedback of the evaluator on the merits of those positions and the likely result of the lawsuit if it went to trial. The evaluator may assist the parties in settling all or some of the issues in dispute. However even when a full settlement is not reached, the hearing provides a useful reality check for litigants, helps to clarify the issues in dispute and prepares the parties for future judicial and extrajudicial dispute resolution processes.
Research conducted by The Canadian Research Institute for Law and the Family shows that these hearings result in high satisfaction rates for litigants, lawyers and evaluators. They promote settlement and the taking of positions supported by the law, and save litigants time, money and emotional stress as a result. They also provide savings to the justice system by reducing the number of contested applications and reducing the number and length of trials.
Based on these findings, the Canadian Research Institute for Law and the Family proposes that a working group be established to explore the implementation of a pilot early neutral evaluation project in Alberta. The Institute makes a variety of recommendations on the optimum characteristics of such a pilot project, drawn from their research, and on the issues the working group must address in its deliberations. In their view, the proposed pilot project aligns well with the objectives and guiding principles of the Reforming the Family Justice System Initiative
presently exploring means of improving the family justice system in Alberta, and may be ideally suited for adoption and evaluation as a prototype by the Initiative.
In addition, this report pairs nicely with the conclusions reached in the Canadian Research Institute for Law and the Family’s 2014 report, “Self-Represented Litigants in Family Law Disputes: Contrasting the Views of Alberta Family Law Lawyers and Judges of the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench” by John-Paul Boyd and Lorne Bertrand. This earlier report concludes that self-represented litigants tend to take unreasonable positions in family law disputes which ultimately reduce the likelihood that these disputes will resolve without a trial. When cases involving self-represented litigants do reach trial, they tend to require more adjournments and take longer to resolve as a result of self-represented litigants’ unfamiliarity with the rules of court, the rules of evidence and the law that applies to their cases, and the results self-represented litigants achieve tend to be worse than the results they would have achieved had they had counsel. An early neutral evaluation program which includes an objective appraisal of the strengths and weaknesses of the parties’ positions would likely be of great assistance to these litigants.
The University of Montreal has announced the launch of a major access to justice research initiative that will bring together more than 40 researchers (from 9 universities) and 44 justice stakeholders, including the Superior Court of Québec, the Court of Québec, the Ministry of Justice of Québec, local legal services organizations, the Québec Bar Association, the Chamber of Notaries, SOQUIJ and Éducaloi. (The full list of partners is available here.)
“The objective of this initiative is to engage a series of pilot projects aimed at redirecting the focus of the judicial system on the individual citizen and thereby transforming justice into a community project,” states Pierre Noreau, scientific director of the project, researcher at the Public Law Research Centre (CRDP) and professor with the Faculty of Law at Université de Montréal. The full press release is available in English here.
L’Université de Montréal a annoncé le lancement d’un important consortium de recherche consacré au thème de l’accès au droit et à la justice. ADAJ regroupe 42 chercheurs et collaborateurs de 9 universités et 44 partenaires de la justice. Il regroupe notamment la Cour supérieure, la Cour du Québec de même que le ministère de la Justice du Québec, de nombreuses cliniques juridiques de quartier, le Barreau du Québec, la Chambre des notaires, SOQUIJ et Éducaloi.
« Le but que nous poursuivons est de réaliser toute une série de projets-pilotes susceptibles de remettre le citoyen au coeur du système juridique pour faire enfin de la justice un projet collectif », affirme Pierre Noreau, directeur scientifique du projet, chercheur au Centre de recherche en droit public (CRDP) et professeur à la Faculté de droit de l’Université de Montréal.
Le communiqué de presse est disponible ici.
The Canadian Forum on Civil Justice (CFCJ) has released several new publications from their Cost of Justice research project, which examines the cumulative social and economic costs associated with everyday legal problems. Stemming from this project are the following recent publications:
1) “The Everyday Legal Problems and the Costs of Justice in Canada: Overview Report”
Gathering data from over 3,000 survey respondents, the Overview Report, available on the CFCJ website here, looks at the public’s experience with the justice system and the various costs (ex: monetary, physical and emotional) that it imposes.
2) “Design And Conduct of the Cost of Justice Survey”
This publication sets out the specific methodology used by the CFCJ research team to collate the survey data. The method of sampling, data collection, and data processing are discussed at length here.
3) “Everyday Legal Problems and Cost of Justice: Survey”
The Cost of Justice Survey was structured to determine the number of respondents who had experienced 84 specific legal problems. The 84 problems were grouped into 17 types, with a section of the survey being devoted to each type. The Survey can be accessed here.
4) “Everyday Legal Problems and the Cost of Justice in Canada: Fact Sheet”
This (updated and revised) Fact Sheet summarizes some of the key findings arising out of the Overview Report. The Fact Sheet can be accessed here.
Are there identifiable patterns in the ways that Canadians of different ethnicities respond to consumer problems? This is the primary question guiding Paths to Justice and the Resolution of Consumer Problems, a Canadian Forum on Civil Justice Cost of Justice Project report by Dr. Les Jacobs, David Kryszajtys & Matthew McManus.
This paper explores consumer problems and commonalities in paths to resolution based on ethnicity, income and education, using data gathered from the CFCJ’s 2014 Everyday Legal Problems and the Cost of Justice in Canada survey. Read Paths to Justice and the Resolution of Consumer Problems: Findings from the 2014 Everyday Legal Problems and the Costs of Civil Justice in Canada National Survey in full in full here.