All Videos | CPD

Date

Wednesday, October 14, 2015
Thursday, October 15, 2015
Friday, October 16, 2015

Theme

Following on the heels of the work of the Canadian Truth and Reconciliation Commission, this Conference presents a unique opportunity for everyone within the administration of justice to consider how best to work towards reconciliation. This Conference will be of interest to judges, lawyers, police officers, correction workers, court administrators, academics, law students, members of tribunals and community workers.

“Finally, this litigation has been both long and expensive, not only in economic but in human terms as well. By ordering a new trial, I do not necessarily encourage the parties to proceed to litigation and to settle their dispute through the courts. As was said in Sparrow, at p. 1105, s. 35(1) “provides a solid constitutional base upon which subsequent negotiations can take place.” Those negotiations should also include other aboriginal nations which have a stake in the territory claimed. Moreover, the Crown is under a moral, if not a legal, duty to enter into and conduct those negotiations in good faith. Ultimately, it is through negotiated settlements, with good faith and give and take on all sides, reinforced by the judgments of this Court, that we will achieve what I stated in Van der Peet, supra, at para. 31, to be a basic purpose of s. 35(1) -- “the reconciliation of the pre-existence of aboriginal societies with the sovereignty of the Crown.” Let us face it, we are all here to stay.” Delgamuukw v. British Columbia (Supreme Court of Canada) [1997] 3 SCR 1010, par. 186

Chair

• The Honourable Justice Georgina Jackson, Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan

Special Advisor

• The Honourable Justice Murray Sinclair, Court of Queen's Bench for Manitoba and Chair of the Canadian Truth and Reconciliation Commission

Planning Committee

• Professor Beth Bilson, Acting Dean, College of Law, University of Saskatchewan
• Ms. Omeasoo Wahpasiw, Ph. D. Student, University of Saskatchewan
• Assistant Commissioner Brenda Butterworth-Carr, Commanding Officer, RCMP, "F" Division, Saskatchewan
• Ms. Maria Campbell, Author, artist, playwright and filmmaker, Saskatchewan
• Chief Tammy Cook Searson, Lac La Ronge Indian Band, Saskatchewan
• Chief Marie-Anne Daywalker, Okanese First Nation, Saskatchewan
• The Honourable Justice Jeffery D. Kalmakoff, Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan
• Ms. Leanne LaPrise, Law Student, College of Law, University of Saskatchewan
• Mr. Mitch McAdam, Director, Aboriginal Law Branch, Ministry of Justice of Saskatchewan, Regina, SK
• The Honourable Judge Gerald M. Morin, Saskatchewan Provincial Court, Prince Albert, SK
• Professor Marilyn Poitras, College of Law, University of Saskatchewan
• The Honourable Chief Justice Martel Popescul, Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench
• Ms. Riva Farrell Racette, Lawyer, MacPherson Leslie & Tyeman LLP, Regina, SK
• Mr. Marcel G. St-Onge, Director, Child and Family Programs, Ministry of Social Services, Saskatoon, SK
• Ms. Beth Symes, C.M., LSM
• Ms. Jan Turner, Assistant Deputy Minister, Courts and Tribunals Division, Ministry of Justice of Saskatchewan, Regina, SK
• Chief Clive Weighill, Saskatoon Police Service, President of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police
• Ms. Michèle Moreau, Executive Director, CIAJ, Montreal, QC

Date

Tuesday, March 17, 2015

Theme

Les textes législatifs traitent constamment des documents et des moyens de communication numériques ayant des incidences juridiques, ce qui pose des grands défis rédactionnels dans un monde de changement technologique. Dans ce contexte, on parle souvent de neutralité technologique.

Or, comme l’avance la Cour fédérale d’appel dans la décision Société Radio-Canada c. Sodrac 2003 Inc. (2014 CAF 84), présentement en appel devant la Cour suprême du Canada, le principe de neutralité technologique peut être compris de différentes façons. Il peut s’agir d’une « neutralité de support » c’est-à-dire d’une règle selon laquelle la valeur d’un document ne dépend pas de son support (papier ou électronique). On peut aussi y voir une notion d’ « équivalence fonctionnelle »; le droit doit régir de la même façon les situations analogues, peu importe la technologie en cause. Enfin pour certains, et on trouve dans la jurisprudence de la Cour suprême des déclarations en ce sens, la règle de la neutralité technologique serait un principe d’interprétation beaucoup plus large, voulant que les lois s’appliquent uniformément, malgré la diversité technologique.

La présentation passera en revue ces différentes approches, fera une récapitulation des principales décisions où la Cour suprême du Canada a expressément fait référence à ce principe et présentera quelques-unes des difficultés que ces développements pourraient entraîner.

Date

Thursday, February 13, 2014

Theme

This conference is intended to bring together many of the actors responsible for ensuring equitable treatment for young persons with mental health problems who come into contact with the criminal justice system. Members of the police, mental health organizations, doctors, lawyers and judges will collaborate to present and discuss the latest developments and preferred practices at the often difficult intersection of criminal justice and mental health. The goals of the conference include updating attendees, fostering discussion and enabling participants to emerge with better tools and firmer links to other justice, health and social service professionals and to the community.

Organizing Committee

Co-Chairs

• The Honourable Justice Michele M. Murphy, Prince Edward Island Court of Appeal, Charlottetown, PE
• Superintendent Mike O'Malley, District Commander, West District, RCMP "J" Division, Fredericton, NB

Members

• Sgt. Andrew Blackadar, RCMP Policy Analyst and Crime Reduction Strategy for PEI, Charlottetown, PE
• Michele Dorsey, Chair, Criminal Code Review Board fro PEI, Charlottetown, PE
• The Honourable Justice William Goodridge, Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador, Trial Division, St. John's, NL
• Brian J. McKenna, Q.C., Executive Director, Strategic Initiatives, Charlottetown, PE

Date

Monday, September 8, 2014
Tuesday, September 9, 2014

Theme

This conference is organized by the CIAJ Legislative Drafting Committee chaired by John Mark Keyes, former Chief Legislative Counsel of Canada. The conference will address a variety of current issues relating to the use and making of regulatory instruments. It will begin by considering how the concept of “nudging” is changing the regulatory landscape by focusing on prompting behavioural changes rather than dictating conduct through legally binding rules. The conference will also look at many important and developing facets of regulatory instruments, including public engagement in regulatory development, drafting questions, incorporation by reference of standards, public access to legislation and parliamentary review of regulation-making. An update on recent case law relating to regulatory instruments will also be provided as well as an address by Mr. Justice Cromwell of the Supreme Court of Canada on Access to Law.

Planning committee

• John Mark Keyes (Chair)
• Mark Audcent
• Jean-François Couture
• Richard Denis
• Janet Erasmus, Q.C.
• Philippe Hallée
• Laura Hopkins
• Barbara Kincaid
• Professor Hoi Kong
• Pamela Muir
• Peter Pagano, Q.C.
• Kimberly Poffenroth
• Mark Spakowski

Date

Thursday, October 16, 2014
Friday, October 17, 2014

Theme

Technology has changed the nature and amount of information available, with direct effects on personal privacy.  There is a pressing need to examine the ways in which these changes are already affecting the criminal law, civil law, the courts, and administrative tribunals, and to begin to chart a principled path forward with respect to these issues.  The changing nature of information, and the attendant effects on privacy, impose new challenges on courts, tribunals, and the administration of justice as a whole.  Greater resources and greater capacity are required to manage and work with the increased volume and more technical nature of evidence, not only in document-intensive civil cases but across the full range of civil, criminal, an administrative matters.  More importantly, courts and tribunals will be the forums in which the evolving law on information and privacy will be determined.  Judges and administrative agency decision-makers will be the actors responsible for ensuring that both the state and private individuals are held appropriately accountable for their use of information, and that privacy interests are articulated and evolve appropriately.

Chair

• The Honourable Chief Justice J. Derek Green, Newfoundland and Labrador, St. John's, NL

Planning Committee

• Mr. Remzi Cej, Chair, Human Rights Commission of Newfoundland and Labrador, St. John's, NL
• Associate Dean Michael Deturbide, Schulich School of Law, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS
• Justice Alphonsus (Fonse) E. Faour, Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador, St. John's, NL
• Judge Colin Flynn, Provincial Court of Newfoundland and Labrador, St. John's, NL
• Judge Patrick Healy, Court of Quebec, Montreal, QC
• Justice Louis Hoegg, Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal, St. John's, NL
• Professor Nicolas Lambert, Faculty of Law, University of Moncton, Moncton, NB
• Mr. Paul McDonald, Partner, Cox & Palmer, St. John's, NL
• Deputy Chief Bill Moore, Halifax Regional Police, Halifax, NS
• Ms. Beth Symes, LSM, CM, Symes Street & Millard LLP, Toronto, ON
• Ms. Mandy Woodland, Mandy Woodland Law, St. John's, NL

Date

Saturday, November 2, 2013

Theme

How should tribunals apply the Charter and Human Rights Codes? Should they be required to use the traditional analyses employed by the courts, or should tribunals be permitted/expected to develop analyses suited to their particular jurisdiction?

Organizing Committee

Chair

• Ms. Andrea Smillie, Appeal Commissioner, Nova Scotia Workers' Compensation Appeals Tribunal, Halifax, NS 

Members

• The Honourable Justice Joel Fichaud, Nova Scotia Court of Appeal, Halifax, NS
• Professor Nicolas Lambert, Faculty of Law, University of Moncton, Moncton, NB
• Ms. Michèle Moreau, CIAJ Executive Director, Montreal, QC
• Professor Sheila Wildeman, Schulich School of Law, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS
• Ms. Beth Symes, C.M., LSM, Symes Street & Millard, LLP, CIAJ President, Toronto, ON
• Mr. Ronald Pink, Q.C., Pink Larkin Lawyers, Halifax, NS

Date

Friday, February 1, 2013

Theme

This conference is intended to bring together many of the actors responsible for ensuring equitable treatment for persons with mental health problems who come into contact with the criminal justice system. As many challenging cases have revealed and as the ratification by Canada of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities mandates, this is a time for change. Persons with lived experience and their advocates, police officers, lawyers and judges, among others, will collaborate to present and discuss the latest developments and preferred practices at the often difficult intersection of criminal justice and mental health. The goals of the conference include updating attendees, fostering discussion and enabling participants to emerge with better tools and firmer links to other justice, health and social service professionals and to the community.

Organizing Committee

Co-Chairs

• The Honourable Judge Anne Derrick, Provincial Court of Nova Scotia, Chair, Hyde Inquiry, Halifax, NS
• The Honourable Justice Joel Fichaud, Nova Scotia Court of Appeal, Halifax, NS
• H. Archibald Kaiser, Professor, Schulich School of Law and Department of Psychiatry, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS

Members

• Constable Michael Alford, RCMP Court Liaison Officer, Kings County, NS
• Staff Sergeant John D. Ennis, Advisory NCO Southwest Nova (District), New Minas, Kings County, NS
• Constable David Fairfax, Community Safety Resource Officer for the RCMP in Nova Scotia
• Ms. Emma Halpern, Equity Officer, Nova Scotia Barristers’ Society, Halifax, NS
• Deputy Chief Bill Moore, Halifax Regional Police, Halifax, NS
• Beth Symes, C.M., LSM, Symes Street Millard, LLP, Toronto, ON

Date

Friday, November 15, 2013

Theme

Webinar on Legislative Drafting sponsored by the Post-Baccalaureate Diploma Program in Legislative Drafting at Athabasca University.

This 2-hour presentation will address practical issues in legislative drafting, based on the “Master Class” session of the 2013 Commonwealth Association of Legislative Counsel conference held April, 2013 in Cape Town, South Africa.

In the CALC master classes, senior drafters from around the Commonwealth participate in a drafting challenge where all participants are provided with the same set of instructions and directed to prepare the required legislation as if it were for their own jurisdiction. The usual results provide a fine demonstration of how different drafters using the same instructions can produce remarkably different but effective drafts.

This year Janet Erasmus, Senior Legislative Counsel with the British Columbia Office of Legislative Counsel, was a master class participant who took a different approach to the challenge. Her draft was not prepared to produce a perfect draft from the instructions, rather it was prepared to demonstrate drafting techniques she uses to invite effective instructions from the instructing officials. In Cape Town, the time for presentation was very short. In this CIAJ/ICAJ webinar, she will talk in more depth about those invitation techniques (both substantive and visual), as well as the readability techniques and other techniques she used in preparing the master class draft.

Date

Thursday, October 10, 2013
Friday, October 11, 2013

Theme

The recent evolution in the law of evidence is a vital topic for those interested in our legal system, whether a decision-maker, advocate, litigator, academic, teacher, student and or law-maker. In the past 25 years, the Supreme Court of Canada has ushered in a set of revolutionary changes to the rules of evidence in several areas, including witness competence, privilege, hearsay and similar act evidence. It has developed a “principled approach” designed to return evidence law to fundamental first principles while conforming to the normative commitments of the Charter. The conference will address how facts are established through rules of evidence in criminal cases and how evidence law impacts the legal system in family law mediation, administrative hearings, civil cases, public inquiries and commissions through innovative, comparative and theoretical perspectives.

Conference Co-Chairs

• The Honourable Chief Justice Annemarie Bonkalo, Ontario Court of Justice, Toronto, ON
• Professor Ronalda Murphy, Counsel, Crown Law Office – Civil Law, Ministry of the Attorney General (Ontario), Toronto, ON, and Professor, Schulich School of Law, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS
• The Honourable Justice Gladys Pardu, Superior Court of Justice (Ontario), Toronto, ON
• Mr. Paul Schabas, Partner, Blakes Toronto, ON

Planning Committee

• Professor Emma Cunliffe, Faculty of Law, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC
• Bart Danko, Osgoode Hall Law Student, Toronto, ON
• The Honourable Justice Georgina Jackson, Saskatchewan Court of Appeal, CIAJ Vice-President, Regina, SK
• The Honourable Justice David Paciocco, Ontario Court of Justice, Ottawa, ON
• Dean Lorne Sossin, Osgoode Hall Law School, York University, Toronto, ON
• Beth Symes, LSM, CM, CIAJ President, Symes Street & Millard LLP, Toronto, ON

Watch videos here

Date

Monday, September 10, 2012
Tuesday, September 11, 2012

Theme

This conference is organized by the CIAJ Legislative Drafting Committee co-chaired by Ms. Judith Keating, Q.C., Deputy Minister of Justice and Attorney General of New Brunswick and John Mark Keyes, Chief Legislative Counsel of Canada. The conference will examine the general structure of legislative systems, including the interplay of different forms of legislation with other regulatory instruments as well as regulatory reform and legislative revision. It will also include updates on recent case law on legislative matters,the impact of international accessibility standards on the publication of legislation and workshops on practical aspects such as ethical issues for legislative counsel and drafting provisions authorizing the making of delegated legislation or governing the commencement of legislation.

Planning committee

• Judith Keating, QC (Chair)
• Mark Audcent
• Pierre Charbonneau
• Richard Denis
• Janet Erasmus, QC
• Philippe Hallée
• Laura Hopkins
• John Mark Keyes
• Barbara Kincaid
• Peter Pagano, QC
• Michel Patrice
• Mark Spakowski

Date

Thursday, October 11, 2012
Friday, October 12, 2012

Theme

Changes in the administration of justice pose challenges for the role of the Courts as the traditional guardians and determiners of fundamental rights, CIAJ's annual conference will consider the impact of these changes as to access to and the cost of justice, the ability of the Courts to adapt and respond, adequate accountability and transparency mechanisms and the necessity of broader structural approaches or legislative steps. The conference will be of interest to members of the legal profession, the judiciary, administrative agencies, arbitrators, mediators, government policy-makers, media and the public.

Conference Co-Chairs

• Greg Harding, Q.C., Partner, Field LLP, Edmonton, AB
• The Honourable Justice Sheilah Martin, Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta, Calgary, AB
• Alastair Lucas, Q.C., Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB
• Gillian Marriott, Q.C., Executive Director, Pro Bono Law Alberta, Calgary, AB

Planning Committee

• The Honourable Judge James Ogle, Provincial Court of Alberta, Calgary, AB
• The Honourable Justice Lorne Giroux, Quebec Court of Appeal, Quebec City, QC
• The Honourable John Vertes, formerly at the Supreme Court of Northwest Territories, CIAJ Immediate Past President, Calgary, AB
• Alastair MacKinnon, JD Student at Law, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB
• Shaunna Mireau, Director of Knowledge Management and Libraries, Field LLP, Edmonton, AB
• Beth Symes, LSM, CM, CIAJ President, Symes Street & Millard LLP, Toronto, ON

Date

Monday, September 26, 2011

Theme

There are many programs that address the needs of people with mental challenges in the context of criminal justice: This session focuses on access to justice for those with mental challenges in our civil and administrative justice systems.

Co-Chairs

• Linda P. Lamoureux, Chair, Health Professions & Health Services Appeal & Review Boards, Ontario Hepatitis C Assistance Plan Review Committee, Transitional Physician Audit Panel, Toronto, ON
• Emanuela Heyninck, Commissioner, Pay Equity Commission, and Member, Health Professions and Services Appeal & Review Boards, Toronto, ON

Date

Thursday, October 13, 2011
Friday, October 14, 2011

Theme

The overall purpose of the conference is to explore how Canadian law has changed with the threat of terrorism in the decade since 9/11. Many of these changes have been controversial, especially in the way in which they reconcile (or not) civil liberties and human rights with enhanced state power to combat terrorism. At the same time, the last decade has been one of several public inquiries, investigating the actual practice of anti-terrorism by Canada’s security services.

Key questions arising from the 2011 conference include, at the broadest level, whether Canadian law has successfully preserved fundamental rights and values of substantive and procedural justice while at the same time contributing to anti-terrorism.

Conference Co-Chairs

• The Honourable Justice Richard Mosley, Federal Court, Ottawa, ON
• The Honourable Judge Dominique Larochelle, Cour du Québec, Laval, QC
• Mr. Bernard Grenier, Ad.E., Schurman Longo Grenier, Montreal, QC

Academic Experts

• Vice Dean Craig Forcese, Faculty of Law (Common Law Section), University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON
• Professor François Crépeau, Faculty of Law, McGill University, Montreal, QC

Organizing Committee

• Mr. Michael W. Duffy, Senior General Counsel (National Security Law), Justice Canada, Ottawa, ON
• Ms. Sylvia Mackenzie, Counsel, Federal Court, Ottawa, ON
• The Honourable Justice Anne Mactavish, Federal Court, Ottawa, ON
• Ms. Beth Symes, LSM, CM, Symes and Street, Toronto, ON

Date

Monday, September 13, 2010
Tuesday, September 14, 2010

Theme

This conference is organized by the CIAJ Legislative Drafting Committee chaired by Ms Judith Keating, Q.C., the Chief Legislative Counsel of New Brunswick. It will focus on how the evolving legal concepts of a diverse community are redefining legislative drafting. Those entrusted with preparing draft legislation bring specialized knowledge and understanding to their creation.  In response to a growing environment, they are further called upon to integrate the new and broader concepts of an evolving global community.

Within that context, particular topics will examine the value and contributions of the legislative drafter to the intricate fabric of legislation; the professional and ethical dimensions of the drafter within a modern, complex work environment; the evolving legal, cultural and language issues that must be considered and integrated into legislation and how they are redefining the way we draft. The conference will also include workshops dealing with practical drafting issues as they relate to English, French and Aboriginal languages.

Conference participants can expect to come away with a better understanding of how legislation is being redefined in broad terms to adapt to an ever changing environment and how the drafting profession is responding to re-imaging of the law.

Planning committee

• Judith Keating, Q.C.(chair), Chief Legislative Counsel of New Brunswick, Fredericton, NB
• Mark Aitken, Director, Northwest Territories Legislation Division, Yellowknife, NT
• Mark Audcent, Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel, Senate of Canada, Ottawa, ON
• Pierre Charbonneau, Senior Legislative Counsel, Department of Justice of Quebec, Quebec City, QC
• Richard Denis, Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel, House of Commons, Ottawa, ON
• Janet Erasmus, Chief Legislative Counsel of British Columbia, Victoria, BC
• Philippe Hallée, Deputy Chief Legislative Counsel, Department of Justice Canada, Ottawa, ON
• Laura Hopkins, Legislative Counsel, Office of Legislative Counsel (Ontario), Toronto, ON
• John Mark Keyes, Chief Legislative Counsel of Canada, Department of Justice Canada, Ottawa, ON
• Barbara Kincaid, General Counsel, Supreme Court of Canada, Ottawa, ON
• Naiomi Metallic, Associate, Burchells LLP, Halifax, NS
• Peter Pagano, Q.C., Chief Legislative Counsel, Department of Justice Alberta, Edmonton, AB
• Rob Walsh, Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel, House of Commons, Ottawa, ON

Date

Thursday, October 14, 2010
Friday, October 15, 2010

Theme

The overall purpose of the conference is to explore the issues in sentencing that need to be addressed in Canada. The focus is on the future: what aspects of sentencing (and the correctional process) should change, and what needs to be done in order to ensure that these changes are made. From the public’s perspective, sentencing appears to be evaluated largely on the basis of whether individual sentences are ‘severe’ enough.

The working assumption of this conference is that the severity of sentences is probably the least difficult question to address: sentences in Canada could, relatively easily, be made ‘twice’ or ‘half’ as severe as they are now. The more fundamental issues – what principles should guide the determination of sentences – would still be with us, even if overall severity were to change in either direction. The challenge of sentencing in the 21st century might be seen as finding the right balance between individualization and judicial discretion, on the one hand, and principled guidance on the other; and, at the same time, ensuring that sentences are, as much as possible, understandable and fair. Defining how one determines what is ‘fair’ is, of course, fundamental.

Chairs

Honorary Chair

• The Honourable Lance S. G. Finch, Chief Justice of British Columbia, and President, International Society for the Reform of Criminal Law, Vancouver, BC

Conference Co-Chairs

• The Honourable Justice Elizabeth Bennett, British Columbia Court of Appeal, Vancouver, BC
• Professor Anthony Doob, Centre of Criminology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON
• Mr. E. David Crossin Q.C., Sugden, McFee & Roos, LLP, Vancouver, BC 

Organizing Committee

• The Honourable Judge Conni Bagnall, Provincial Court of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC
• The Honourable Judge Marion Buller Bennett, Provincial Court of British Columbia, Port Coquitlam, BC
• Commissioner Don Head, Correctional Service of Canada, Ottawa, ON
• The Honourable Judge Patrick Healy, Court of Quebec, Montreal, QC

Date

Thursday, September 11, 2008
Friday, September 12, 2008

Theme

This conference organized by the CIAJ Legislative Drafting Committee, chaired by Mr. John Mark Keyes, Chief Legislative Counsel of Canada, will focus on the intersecting roles of those involved in determining the wording of legislative texts (statutes and regulations). This group most obviously includes legislative drafters whose task is to turn drafting instructions into text. But it also includes those responsible for developing drafting instructions and their underlying policy, whether acting within government or parliamentary institutions as policy officials or legal advisers, or outside these institutions on behalf of interest groups. Draft texts are also often further processed by yet another constituency that includes translators, editors, jurilinguists and bijuralists. Finally, parliamentarians and subordinate legislative authorities are involved in writing, reviewing, amending and adopting draft texts that are presented to them.

The multiplicity of participants in law-making processes poses the question that forms the title of the conference: who really writes the law? What are the distinctive roles of these participants? Are there overlaps or conflicts? Are these roles evolving in response to changes in the political culture or environment for law-making? The conference speakers will consider these questions and more. Conference participants can expect to come away with a better understanding of the legislative landscape and, if not a definitive answer to the main question, at least a point of view.

Planning Committee

• John Mark Keyes, (Chair) Chief Legislative Counsel of Canada, Department of Justice Canada, Ottawa, ON
• France Allard, General Counsel, Manager and Comparative Law Specialist, Department of Justice Canada, Ottawa, ON
• Mark Audcent, Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel, Senate of Canada, Ottawa, ON
• Pierre Charbonneau, Senior Legislative Counsel, Department of Justice of Quebec, Quebec City, QC
• Richard Denis, Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel, House of Commons, Ottawa, ON
• Janet Erasmus, Chief Legislative Counsel of British Columbia, Victoria, BC
• Nicole Fernbach, President, Juricom, Montreal, QC
• Philippe Hallée, Deputy Chief Legislative Counsel, Department of Justice Canada, Ottawa, ON
• Laura Hopkins, Legislative Counsel, Office of Legislative Counsel (Ontario), Toronto, ON
• Judith Keating, Q.C., Chief Legislative Counsel of New Brunswick, Fredericton, NB
• Barbara Kincaid, General Counsel, Supreme Court of Canada, Ottawa, ON
• Peter Pagano, Q.C., Chief Legislative Counsel, Department of Justice Alberta, Edmonton, AB
• Donald Revell, Legal Drafting Consultant, former Chief Legislative Counsel of Ontario, Toronto, ON
• Rob Walsh, Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel, House of Commons, Ottawa, ON