dicta

dicta – law in audio

Education EN ↓ 529 episodes

We’re transforming legal learning through immersive audio streaming. Find out more about us on our website: dicta.dev

Author

dicta

Episodes

Prof. Burningham – September 21 – Nova Scotia Pharmaceutical Society, 1992 SCC 19:40

Judgment of the Court (Gonthier J) Facts – (0:00:33) A. Vagueness under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms – (0:01:39) 1. The Case Law of this Court – (0:01:44) 2. The Proper Place of the Doctrine of Vagueness in Charter Adjudication – (0:03:50) 3. The Content of the Doctrine of Vagueness – (0:06:05) (a) Fair Notice to the Citizen – (0:06:45) (b) Limitation of Law Enforcement Discretion –...

Prof. Burningham – September 21 – Oakes, 1986 SCC 13:30

Dickson CJ (Chouinard, Lamer, Wilson, Le Dain JJ, concurring) Headnote – (0:00:31) Is section 8 of the Narcotic Control Act a Reasonable and Demonstrably Justified Limit Pursuant to section 1 of the Charter? – (0:01:58)

Prof. Burningham – September 28 – Irwin Toy, 1989 SCC 44:29

The Chief Justice and Lamer and Wilson JJ. Preamble – (0:00:37) One: The Relevant Legislative and Constitutional Provisions – (0:01:07) Six: Whether sections 248 and 249 Limits Freedom of Expression as Guaranteed by the Canadian and Quebec Charters – (0:03:34) B: The First Step - Was the Plaintiff's Activity Within the Sphere of Conduct Protected by Freedom of Expression? – (0:03:44) C: The Se...

Prof. Burningham – September 28 – Keegstra, 1990 SCC 1:59:47

The judgment of Dickson C.J. and Wilson, L'Heureux-Dubé and Gonthier One: Facts – (0:00:54) Three: Relevant Statutory and Constitutional Provisions – (0:03:19) Five: The History of Hate Propaganda Crimes in Canada – (0:06:28) Six: Section 2 sub b of the Charter -- Freedom of Expression – (0:10:27) Seven: Section 1 Analysis of Section 319 sub 2 – (0:21:31) A: General Approach to Section 1 – (0:21:3...

Prof. Burningham – September 28 – Montréal (City), 2005 SCC 28:51

The judgment of McLachlin C.J. and Bastarache, LeBel, Deschamps, Abella and Charron JJ 1. Introduction – (0:00:23) 2. Origins of the Case – (0:01:13) 3.2.1. Expressive Content – (0:03:37) 3.2.2. Excluded Expression – (0:04:04) 3.2.3. The Infringement – (0:15:49) 3.3. Is the Limit Justified Under Section 1 of the Canadian Charter? – (0:17:08) 3.4. Conclusion on the Constitutional Issue – (0:23:20)...

Prof. Burningham – October 12 – Amselem, 2004 SCC 53:53

The judgment of McLachlin C.J. and Iacobucci, Major, Arbour and Fish JJ One: Introduction – (0:00:40) Two: Background – (0:02:52) Three: Relevant Legislative Provisions – (0:07:54) Five: Issues – (0:08:56) Six: Analysis – (0:09:36) A: Freedom of Religion – (0:09:38) 1: Definition of Religious Freedom – (0:09:53) 2: Infringement of Religious Freedom – (0:19:28) 3: Alleged Justification for the Limi...

Prof. Burningham – October 12 – Ktunaxa, 2017 SCC 9:24

The judgment of McLachlin C.J. and Abella, Karakatsanis, Wagner, Gascon, Brown and Rowe JJ. Introduction – (0:00:13) The Scope of Freedom of Religion – (0:03:27) The reasons of Moldaver and Côté JJ were delivered by – (0:07:35) Overview – (0:07:41)

Prof. Burningham – October 12 – Trinity Western University, 2018 SCC 40:33

The judgment of Abella, Moldaver, Karakatsanis, Wagner and Gascon JJ One: Overview – (0:00:19) Two: Background – (0:01:34) A: The Parties – (0:01:36) B: TWU’s Proposed Law School – (0:02:55) C: The LSBC’s Decision Not to Approve TWU’s Proposed Law School – (0:04:03) Four: Analysis – (0:06:09) A: Questions on Appeal – (0:06:11) B: The Scope of the LSBC’s Statutory Mandate – (0:07:00) 1: Whether Fre...

Prof. Burningham – October 12 – Saguenay, 2017 SCC 9:21

English version of the judgment of McLachlin C.J. and LeBel, Rothstein, Cromwell, Moldaver, Karakatsanis, Wagner and Gascon JJ.

Prof. Burningham – October 26 – Carter, 2015 SCC 4:09

The Protected Interests: Life

Prof. Burningham – October 26 – Children's Aid Society of Metropolitan Toronto, 1995 SCC 5:11

The judgment of La Forest, Gonthier and McLachlin JJ. Facts – (0:00:43) Issues – (0:03:53) Analysis – (0:04:25) Appeal: Constitutional Questions – (0:04:31) Section 7 of the Charter – (0:04:35) Section 7 of the Charter and Parental Liberty – (0:05:11)

Prof. Burningham – October 26 – Morgentaler, 1988 SCC 24:35

The Protected Interests: Liberty

Prof. Burningham – October 26 – Longueuil (City), 1997 SCC 7:33

The Protected Interest: Liberty

Prof. Burningham – October 26 – Malmo-Levine, 2003 SCC 6:49

The Protected Interest: Liberty

Prof. Burningham – October 26 – NB v G(J), 1999 SCC 13:08

The judgment of Lamer C.J. and Gonthier, Cory, McLachlin, Major and Binnie JJ. Preamble – (0:00:21) Factual Background – (0:02:06) Issues – (0:04:23) Analysis – (0:04:54) Security of the Person – (0:04:56)

Prof. Burningham – October 26 – Blencoe, 2000 SCC 29:26

The judgment of McLachlin C.J. and L’Heureux-Dubé, Gonthier, Major and Bastarache JJ. One: Introduction – (0:00:19) Two: Factual Background – (0:00:49) B: Have the Respondent’s Section 7 Rights to Liberty and Security of the Person Been Violated by State-caused Delay in Human Rights Proceedings? – (0:02:15) b: Applicability of Section 7 Outside the Criminal Context – (0:02:24) c: Section 7 – Gener...

Prof. Burningham – October 26 – Bedford, 2013 SCC 9:38

Causation

Prof. Burningham – October 26 – Re BC MVA, 1985 SCC 18:45

The judgment of Dickson C.J. and Beetz, Chouinard, Lamer and Le Dain JJ. Introduction – (0:00:17) The Facts – (0:00:40) The Legislation – (0:01:29) Section 7 – (0:02:59) Introduction – (0:03:01) The Nature and Legitimacy of Constitutional Adjudication Under the Charter – (0:03:27) The Principles of Fundamental Justice – (0:11:49)

Prof. Burningham – October 26 – Bedford, 2013 SCC 1:08:18

The judgment of the Court Preamble – (0:00:14) One: The Case – (0:00:59) Four: Discussion – (0:10:15) A: Preliminary Issues – (0:10:40) 1: Revisiting the Prostitution Reference – (0:10:43) 2: Deference to the Application Judge’s Findings on Social and Legislative Facts – (0:15:46) B: Section 7 Analysis – (0:21:11) 1: Is Security of the Person Engaged? – (0:21:37) a: Sections 197 and 210 – Keeping...

Prof. Burningham – October 26 – Carter, 2015 SCC 58:33

One: Introduction – (0:00:10) Two: Background – (0:02:20) Six: Was the Trial Judge Bound by Rodriguez? – (0:16:32) 8: Section 7 – (0:20:13) A: Does the Law Infringe the Right to Life, Liberty and Security of the Person? – (0:21:08) 1: Life – (0:21:13) 2: Liberty and Security of the Person – (0:24:53) 3: Summary on Section 7 – Life, Liberty and Security of the Person – (0:30:13) B: The Principles o...

Prof. Burningham – October 26 – Michaud, 2015 ONCA 34:43

The judgment of the Court Preamble – (0:00:12) D. The Second Question – Is section 68.1 sub 1 of the HTA Unconstitutional Because it Violates the Right to Security of the Person Under S 7 of the Charter? – (0:03:47) (1) The governing principles: The Bedford framework – (0:04:21) (2) The application of the governing principles from Bedford – (0:08:08) (3) Conclusion on the application of section 7...

Prof. Burningham – November 13 – Andrews, 1989 SCC 38:05

The reasons of McIntyre and Lamer JJ. (Dissenting in Part) Preamble – (0:00:17) The Concept of Equality – (0:03:09) Discrimination – (0:19:19) Relationship Between section 15 sub 1 and section 1 of the Charter – (0:26:05) Approaches to section 15 sub 1 – (0:27:45)

Prof. Burningham – November 13 – Fraser, 2020 SCC 1:32:28

The judgment of Wagner C.J. and Abella, Moldaver, Karakatsanis, Martin and Kasirer JJ. Preamble – (0:00:17) Analysis – (0:02:56) Application – (0:30:26) The reasons of Brown and Rowe JJ. – (0:49:58) One: Introduction – (0:50:03) Three: Analysis – (0:54:40) A: Step One of the Section 15 Analysis – (0:54:42) B: Step Two of the Section 15 Analysis – (1:05:32) C: Practical Implications – (1:13:04) Fou...

Prof. Burningham – November 16 – Sharma, 2022 SCC 52:10

The judgment of Wagner C.J. and Moldaver, Côté, Brown and Rowe JJ One: Introduction – (0:00:15) Two: Facts – (0:02:15) Three: Legislative Framework – (0:03:32) Five: Analysis – (0:04:52) A: Section 15 – (0:04:54) 1: Guidance on the Section 15 sub 1 Framework – (0:09:22) a: Preliminary Point About Substantive Equality – (0:09:26) b: Step One – Proving the Law, on its Face or in its Impact, Creates...

Prof. Burningham – November 20 – Kapp, 2008 SCC 28:20

The judgment of McLachlin C.J. and Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella, Charron and Rothstein JJ. A: Introduction – (0:00:19) 2: Section 15 sub 2 – (0:02:21) a: Has as Its Object – (0:14:24) b: Amelioration – (0:21:33) c: Disadvantaged – (0:23:16) 3: Application of Section 15 sub 2 to This Case – (0:24:03)