David Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights

Reference Re Assisted Human Reproduction Act
2011-11-04 - 2011-11-05
Implications of the Supreme Court’s Decision
November 4-5, 2011
Bennett Lecture Hall
Faculty of Law
University of Toronto
78 Queen’s Park Cres, Toronto, ON
The Supreme Court of Canada released its decision in the Reference re. the Assisted Human Reproduction Act this past spring, striking down some sections and leaving others intact on constitutional grounds. What does this mean for future practice and regulation in this area? What are the regulatory implications for other areas of law that have federal and provincial impacts? What does this mean for reproductive and privacy rights in Canada? How can Canada regulate this area in the global picture?
Keynote presentations to include a dialogue between Preston Manning and Carolyn Bennett, moderated by Steve Paikin, anchor and senior editor, The Agenda with Steve Paikin, and viewing of the CBC documentary, Offspring, with producer Barry Stevens.
Speakers include Peter Hogg, Bernard Dickens, Colleen Flood, Marilyn Pilkington, Carol Rogerson, Trudo Lemmens, Joseph Arvay, Dr. Clifford Librach, Ian Lee, Marie-Claude Premont, Glenn Rivard, Francoise Baylis and Karen Busby, among others.
Topics covered will include:
General overview of the case
Quebec’s arguments for the challenge
Use of the criminal law power
International perspectives
Moral dimensions of AHR; why is AHR practice different from general medical practice
AHRA and reproductive rights; rights of children
Implications for the current federal regulatory state
Current legal landscape and it practical implications for lawyers, medical practitioners and families.
Registration Fee: $200.00 (reduced rates for students, government and NGOs -click on REGISTRATION below for details).
PROGRAM FLYER
CONFERENCE AGENDA
REGISTRATION IS NOW CLOSED

Working Group Call for Proposals
2012-08-02
The Asper Centre working groups aim to provide U of T students with an opportunity to conduct legal research and assist in advocacy on Canadian constitutional rights issues (often in partnership with an external organization).
The Asper Centre requires all potential working groups (including existing working groups) to submit a written proposal for consideration by the Asper Centre Working Groups Selection Committee (“the Committee”). The Committee will select the most competitive proposals to form the Asper Centre Working Groups for the following year.
The purpose of the proposal requirement is to enhance the student experience and to ensure that our assistance is of the highest quality and value to our partners. The proposal-based working group model facilitates oversight by the Centre’s Executive Director, allows for further engagement with faculty, and ensures consistency across working groups.
Please contact Cheryl Milne if you need additional information or ideas to form a working group.
Link to Call for Proposals with application instructions.
ASPER CENTRE OUTLOOK NEWSLETTER: If you wish to become a newsletter editor for 2012-2013, please submit an email to Cheryl Milne with an outline of your experience by the deadline for working group application (5:00 pm, August 2, 2012).

Social Science Evidence in Charter Litigation
2012-11-09 08:30 - 2012-11-12 17:00 (America/Toronto)
Developments in Thirty Years of Fact Finding
What have we learned? What could we do better?
Event date: Friday, November 09, 2012, from 8:30 AM to 5:00 PM
Location: Flavelle House, Faculty of Law, University of Toronto
Opening Plenary Panel: The Challenges for Judges
Justice Robert Sharpe (Ontario Court of Appeal); Justice Susan Himel (Ontario Superior Court of Justice – Bedford v Canada); Justice Lynn Smith (Supreme Court of British Columbia – Carter v Canada)
Workshop topics include: a theory of constitutional facts; framework for reliability analysis; judging social science evidence—a feminist perspective; linking social science evidence with individual testimony; use of social science in specific cases such as Polygamy Reference, Gosselin, R v Bryan, Canada v PHS Community Services (Insite case); and more …
PROGRAM

Constitutional Remedies: Are They Effective and Meaningful?
2014-02-28 08:30 - 17:00
REGISTRATION NOW CLOSED
LINK TO LIVE WEBCAST
Keynote Address
For more information contact Kara Norrington at kara.norrington@utoronto.ca
The David Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights is hosting a conference examining in detail the remedies available in constitutional litigation.
Papers and panel discussions will stimulate and develop an ongoing dialogue on the effectiveness of remedies. The goal is to examine the available remedies pursuant to s.24 and s.52 of the Charter as well as remedies for the violation of Aboriginal and treaty rights under the constitution. Key themes include the following.
• Will the promise of the Ward Charter damage claim be realized? Issues related to the quantum of damages in relation to the costs and risks of litigation; the interaction between Charter and tort claims.
• The role of injunctions and declarations: Would/should the Supreme Court affirm supervisory jurisdiction as it did in Doucet Boudreau if it heard the case today; are injunctions necessary or will declarations suffice including in litigation with respect to conditions of confinement and positive rights? What can be learned from comparative experiences?
• Remedies for violations of Aboriginal and treaty rights: What are the remedies for breach of the duty to consult and are they meaningful and effective?
• Remedies for unconstitutional legislation: Are the courts employing the soft remedies of reading down and suspended declarations of invalidity too much?
Opening Plenary Debate: Be it resolved that Judges can rewrite statutes to make them constitutional
Debaters: Prof. Kent Roach and Prof. Hamish Stewart
Moderator: Hon. Justice Robert Sharpe, Ontario Court of Appeal
Keynote Speaker: Professor Sandra Liebenberg
H.F.Oppenheimer Chair in Human Rights Law Department of Public Law Faculty of Law, University of Stellenbosch, SA
Accreditation: This program is worth 5.0 substantive hours and 0 professionalism hours.
Full Program Here

The Case Against 8 - Special Screening
2014-10-14 12:00 - 14:00
Battles Are Won Because They Are Fought!
The Case Against 8 is a behind-the-scenes look inside the historic case to overturn California’s ban on same-sex marriage. The high-profile trial first makes headlines with the unlikely pairing of Ted Olson and David Boies, political foes who last faced off as opposing attorneys in Bush v Gore. The film also follows the plaintiffs, two gay couples who find their families at the centre of the same-sex marriage controversy. Five years in the making, this is the story of how they took the first federal marriage equality lawsuit to the US Supreme Court.
Co-sponsored with Out in Law, and the International Human Rights Program.
Event date: Tuesday, October 14, 2014, from 12:10 PM to 2:00 PM
Location: Alumni Hall (VC 112), Victoria College, University of Toronto
View the Event Poster HERE.

R v Kokopenace: The Panel
2014-10-15 12:30 - 14:00
The Aboriginal Law Program Speaker Series and the Constitutional Roundtable present:
“R v Kokopenace: The Panel”

Heard before the Supreme Court on October 6, 2014, R v Kokopenace is a case concerning the representativeness of jury panels in Ontario, particularly with respect to First Nations people living on-reserve and the role of s. 6(8) of the Juries Act. Issues in this case involve the constitutional right to an impartial jury, the meaning of representativeness, reasonable efforts required by the Crown to attain representativeness, and the appropriate remedy failing reasonable efforts. Join us for a panel of the parties (featured below), who will discuss their arguments to the Court and responses to questions posed by the Bench. Panelists include Brian Greenspan, Jessica Orkin, Cheryl Milne, Mary Eberts, Julian Roy and Christa Big Canoe.
View event poster here.
Wednesday, October 15, 2014
12:30-2pm
Alumni Hall, Victoria College, University of Toronto
Lunch provided. RSVP: n.gulezko@utoronto.ca

Autonomy, Subsidiarity and Solidarity: The Foundations of Cooperative Federalism
2015-01-13 12:30 - 14:00
CONSTITUTIONAL ROUNDTABLE
presents
Hugo Cyr, Université du Québec à Montréal
Tuesday, January 13, 2015
Solarium (room FA2), Falconer Hall
84 Queen’s Park
What does the constitutional principle of federalism entail? Instead of a detailed set of specific rules, the principle of federalism relies on a series of principles that distinguish federations from other political forms. I propose that three such principles stand out from within our constitutional instruments and jurisprudence: autonomy, subsidiarity and federal solidarity. The combination of these three interrelated constitutional principles forms the normative structure that gives Canadian federalism its internal logic. And it is my contention that this internal logic is one of cooperative federalism. It is these principles that must guide the judiciary when it fulfills its special duty as “guardian of the Constitution”, and as such, as guardian of the principle of federalism.
Hugo Cyr, LL.B., B.C.L. (McGill), LL.M. (Yale), LL.D. (Université de Montréal). Full Professor, Director of Graduate Studies in Law, Faculty of Political Science and Law, Université du Québec à Montréal (UQAM), is a member of the Quebec Bar and the Centre de recherche interdisciplinaire sur la diversité au Québec (CRIDAQ). Hugo Cyr has been a law clerk to the Honorable Justice Ian Binnie of the Supreme Court of Canada, a Visiting Researcher at the European Academy of Legal Theory, a Boulton Fellow at McGill University and a Schell Fellow at the Yale Law School. Professor Cyr teaches and conducts research in constitutional law and legal theory.
A light lunch will be provided.
Read the Paper here.

Life, Liberty and Equality - Canadian-Style: The Interplay Between Sections 7 and 15 of the Charter
2015-02-27 09:00 - 14:00
This half-day conference examined in detail the interplay between sections 7 and 15 of the Charter.
Papers were presented that stimulated and developed an ongoing exploration of the relationship between sections 7 and 15. Issues addressed include:
• Is equality a principle of fundamental justice under section 7?
• How have the courts treated the two separate grounds for challenging government action?
• Are their strategic advantages to pleading both grounds or only one?
• Protecting marginalized groups.
• How does the relationship between the sections play out in circumstances such as challenges to mental health legislation?
Archived webcast CLICK HERE
Lunch Time Plenary: Carter v AG Canada – UofT’s Legal Experts Comment on the Decision
Speakers: Trudo Lemmens, Hamish Stewart, Sophia Moreau, Carol Rogerson, David Schneiderman, Denise Reaume
CONFERENCE AGENDA
Location: Alumni Hall, Victoria College, University of Victoria at the University of Toronto

Book Launch - False Security by Prof Kent Roach and Craig Forcese
2015-10-08 18:00 - 20:00
All are welcome to attend the book launch for False Security: The Radicalization of Canadian Anti-Terrorism , the latest book by Professor Kent Roach from the University of Toronto – Faculty of Law and co-author Professor Craig Forcese, from the University of Ottawa – Faculty of Law. The book launch will be followed by a panel discussion with other esteemed panelists.
Panelists include:
Ron Atkey P.C., Q.C., first Chair of the Security Intelligence Review Committee
Joe Fogarty, former UK government security liaison to Canada
Sukanya Pillay, General Counsel, Canadian Civil Liberties Association
Craig Forcese, Author and Associate Professor of Law, University of Ottawa
Kent Roach, Author and Professor of Law, University of Toronto
with Jonathan Kay from The Walrus as moderator.
Book Launch – False Security – Kent Roach and Craig Forcese
Location: Victoria College – 2nd Floor, Room 213 – 91 Charles St. West
(2015)

The State of Canada's Constitutional Democracy
2016-02-26 08:00 - 2016-02-27 17:00
SYMPOSIUM
February 26 – 27, 2016
Faculty of Law, University of Toronto (Room: Solarium, FA2)
The David Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights, University of Toronto and the Centre for Constitutional Studies, University of Alberta, co-organized this symposium examining the state of Canada’s constitutional democracy. Dramatic changes have taken place in recent years at the national level in respect to the day to day functioning of our constitutional democracy. These changes impinge on the separation of powers, the rule of law and the supremacy of the constitution.
Examples of topics covered included:
• the operation of the House of Commons and the Senate and the functioning of committees in both Houses in respect to the quality of deliberation, reflection on questions of constitutionality generally, and in respect to specific policy areas,
• the increased powers of the PMO
• the appointment process to the Senate and the Supreme Court
• the stance taken by the government to some aspects of the Constitution and the judiciary,
• the government’s approach to information creation, retention and dissemination as well as sources of expertise and scientific knowledge, as it impacts on public policy areas such as health, climate change, resource development, Aboriginal education, women’s equality
• the Court’s role to strike down legislation and critique government action and the government’s response to this such as the aftermath of the PHS case, Bedford and Carter, and the SCC’s declaration in Khadr.
• the professional ethics applicable to the work of government lawyers in a more politicized environment
Our interest in examining these changes was to assess their impact on the norms and processes stipulated by our written Constitution as well as by fundamental constitutional principles and conventions.
This symposium was part of a broader analysis by the Asper Centre of the state of the rule of law and Canada’s constitutional democracy comprising background papers and additional workshops that resulted in a now available final report.
Symposium Agenda
READ MORE ABOUT THE SYMPOSIUM HERE

Clinical Legal Education Conference
2016-07-10 08:00 - 2016-07-13 17:00
THE RISKS AND REWARDS OF CLINICAL LEGAL EDUCATION PROGRAMMES
The Asper Centre is collaborating with the Association for Canadian Clinical Education and the International Journal of Clinical Legal Education in the organization and hosting of the 2016 Clinical Legal Education Conference at the University of Toronto, Faculty of Law.
Dates: July 10- 13, 2016
Registration open here on the Eventbrite page. Early Bird Registration closes on April 30 (regular price applies after that date).
Read the Conference Brochure

Working Group Call for Proposals
2016-08-15
2016-2017 WORKING GROUPS
University of Toronto, Faculty of Law students wishing to propose a 2016/2017 Working Group must email a proposal to Cheryl Milne, cheryl.milne@utoronto.ca by 5 p.m. on August 15, 2016. Applications should include the following:
a) The name/title of the Working Group
b) The issue the group will be working on, and why the issue is important
c) Name(s) of the student leader(s) and brief background information
d) Name and description of partnership organization, and letter of support from the organization (if applicable)
e) Description of proposed research or advocacy project for the year, including project goals and expected outcomes.
Successful groups will be notified prior to the start of term.
For more detailed information on how to lead a Working Group, read the full call for proposals here.

Call for Asper Centre students 2016/2017
2016-08-26
The deadline for applications for the is August 26, 2016.
Call for Asper Centre students 2016-2017

Asper Centre / IHRP 2017 Summer Fellowship Information Session
2016-10-24 12:30 - 14:00
Information about how to apply for an Asper Centre summer fellowship to work in an organization within Canada that focuses on constitutional / human rights advocacy.

(October 2016)

Morris A. Gross Lecture - the Honourable George R. Strathy, Chief Justice of Ontario
2017-01-19 16:30 - 18:00
Judicial Courage and Restraint in Canadian Constitutional History
The Morris A. Gross Memorial Lecture was established in memory of the late Morris A. Gross by the law firm Minden Gross LLP and by members of his family, friends and professional associates. The intention of the lectureship is to, every two years, bring to the Faculty of Law a distinguished scholar or a member of the practicing bar or bench for discussion with the student body and Faculty, and to deliver the bi-annual Morris A. Gross Memorial Lecture.
This year, the Morris A. Gross Memorial Lecture will be delivered by the Honourable George R. Strathy, Chief Justice of Ontario, as an introduction to the David Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights’ 2017 Constitutional Roundtable series, which will be in celebration of Canada’s Sesquicentennial.
The Honourable George R. Strathy was appointed Chief Justice of Ontario June 13, 2014. He was appointed to the Court of Appeal for Ontario on April 25, 2013. For the previous five years he served as a judge of the Superior Court of Justice in the Toronto Region, where he presided over civil, class action and criminal matters. Chief Justice Strathy received a Bachelor of Arts degree from McGill University in 1970 and was awarded a Woodrow Wilson Fellowship to pursue graduate studies. He received a Master of Arts degree in International Relations at the University of Toronto in 1971. He attended the Faculty of Law at the University of Toronto and was awarded the Gold Medal in 1974.
In practice, he specialized in civil litigation, with particular emphasis in Maritime and Transportation Law. He was a partner in the firms of MacKinnon, McTaggart, Campbell Godfrey and Lewtas, and Fasken Martineau Walker before establishing his own firm in 1991. The firm ultimately became Strathy & Isaacs. He was active in a number of professional organizations, including the Canadian Bar Association (Chair of the Young Lawyers’ Division and member of the Executive Committee), the Canadian Maritime Law Association (Vice-President), the Canadian Association of Maritime Arbitrations (Vice-President), and the Canadian Association of Average Adjusters (Chairman). He is the author of two books on marine insurance in Canada as well as numerous papers and articles.
Chief Justice Strathy is married to Elyse Strathy. They have five daughters and seven grandchildren. He is an enthusiastic, but not particularly talented, squash player, golfer and tandem cyclist.

Constitutional Roundtable - Hugo Cyr
2017-02-09 12:30 - 14:00
Hugo Cyr
Dean and Professor of Public Law and Legal Theory
Université du Québec à Montréal
Normalizing the Exception in Canada
Thursday, February 9, 2017
12:30 – 2:00
Room J-140, Jackman Law Building
78 Queen’s Park
Extraordinary measures may sometimes be justified as being necessary to deal with exceptional events. Those measures may become normalized when the taboo against taking them is broken and their initial justifications are detached from their repeated uses. In this article, I want to highlight the process of normalization of the exception in the Canadian constitutional context. In particular, I wilI show how a situation of extreme necessity may have pushed the Supreme Court to develop an extraordinary constitutional remedy – the suspension of a judgment of unconstitutionality – and how such remedy was later normalized. In 1985, the Supreme Court of Canada temporarily suspended the effectiveness of its opinion that all the laws adopted by the Province of Manitoba between 1890 and 1985 were unconstitutional. The Supreme Court, ironically, attempted to justify the suspension as being necessary to protect the rule of law. Following that opinion, the Supreme Court gradually went on to use that suspension mechanism in several different contexts. Now, detached from its original justification, this mechanism is used on a purely discretionary basis by judges to suspend the effect of their decisions that certain statutes are unconstitutional. In short, the possibility for Courts to suspend the effectiveness of the Constitution has been normalized, despite the fact that Canada, according to the preamble of the Constitution Act, 1982, is supposedly “founded upon principles that recognize (…) the rule of law”.
Hugo Cyr, LL.B., B.C.L. (McGill), LL.M. (Yale), LL.D. (U. de Montréal), is Dean and Professor of Public Law and Legal Theory at the Université du Québec à Montréal and a member of the Québec Bar. He is a member of the Centre de recherche interdisciplinaire sur la diversité et la démocratie (CRIDAQ). He has been a Boulton Fellow at McGill University, a Schell Fellow at Yale Law School, a law clerk to the Honourable Justice Ian C. Binnie of the Supreme Court of Canada, and a Visiting Researcher at the European Academy of Legal Theory and Visiting Professor at McGill University. He is frequently consulted by governments, media and private parties for his expertise in constitutional law.
A light lunch will be provided.

Dr. Anver Emon Special Lecture
2017-02-28 12:30 - 14:00
What’s the fuss about “Islam” and “Muslims” ?
Thinking in an Age of Information Overload
Special Lecture by Dr. Anver Emon
Professor and Canada Research Chair in Religion, Pluralism, and the Rule of Law
University of Toronto Faculty of Law

Moderated by Cheryl Milne, Executive Director Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights
From the Brexit referendum in the UK, the election of Donald Trump in the US, and the most recent tragedy at a mosque in Quebec City, it is hard not to notice that politicians of various stripes have “Islam” and “Muslims” on the brain. So many want to talk about what “Islam” is or who “Muslims” really are. In this talk, we will explore the political work done when “Islam” and “Muslim” are invoked. Whether as social constructions or literary tropes, “Islam” and “Muslim” become proxies for something that all of us have a stake in defining, but must now reclaim as our own. Professor Emon will offer a framework for filtering the random bits of information that fall from the Twitter-sphere. Also, participants are invited to submit in advance a media headline and story that they want to discuss and problematize.
Participants are invited to submit in advance a media headline/story that they want to discuss and problematize.
NO REGISTRATION REQUIRED * LIGHT LUNCH PROVIDED

Feb 28, 2017

Constitutional Roundtable - Richard Haigh
2017-03-01 12:30 - 14:00
ASPER CENTRE CONSTITUTIONAL ROUNDTABLE
presents
Richard Haigh
Osgoode Hall Law School
York University
The Alberta Press Case
Wednesday, March 1, 2017
12:30 – 2:00
Room J-140, Jackman Law Building
78 Queen’s Park
This paper/presentation will focus on the Reference re Alberta Statutes case (more colloquially known as the Alberta Press Case). The case is fascinating for a number of reasons. First, it is one of the earliest signals of the Supreme Court of Canada “finding its feet” and gaining a belief in its own stature and strength. Second, it is a case well known for a kind of Denning-like pronouncement from Chief Justice Duff (before Denning was even a judge!) on the idea of an implied bill of rights — judicial creativity that some might say was results-driven, others might say was a brilliantly conceived concept to achieve justice. Third, it is also a case of a province trying to expand its mandate into areas that could not have been easily imagined, and the Court using federalism as a sword. Finally, it may have been the precursor to many debates about whether Canada should have a formal bill of rights, and how we could repatriate our Constitution — put differently, it is a case that foreshadowed much to come in terms of the 1982 amendments.
Richard Haigh is an Assistant Professor at Osgoode Hall Law School and Director of York’s Centre for Public Policy and Law and Co-Director of the Part-Time LLM in Constitutional Law at Osgoode. He has a doctorate from the University of Toronto in the area of freedom of conscience and religion. He was, until December 2007, the Associate Director, Graduate Program at Osgoode Professional Development. He has been a Senior Lecturer at Deakin University in Melbourne, Australia, a Senior Advisor at the National Judicial Institute in Ottawa, and a Legal Research and Writing Lecturer at Osgoode. His research and teaching interests include Constitutional Law, Public Law, and Equity and Trusts. His recent published works include papers on the Supreme Court’s use of metaphor, division of powers in freedom of expression cases, freedom of conscience and whistleblowing, freedom of religion, dialogue theory, noise by-laws, election financing laws and prisoner’s voting rights; he also contributed a chapter to the State and Citizen casebook on Public Law (Emond-Montgomery, 3rd ed.).
A light lunch will be provided.
For more information, contact tal.schreier@utoronto.ca

Asper Centre Presents: Careers in Constitutional Law
2017-03-02 12:30 - 14:00
The Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights presents a lunchtime seminar on
Careers in Constitutional Law
Are you a JD Candidate with a passion for promoting Charter rights?
Do you want to learn about the numerous career paths that exist for students wishing to practice Constitutional Law?
MEET and get ADVICE from four lawyers (3 are UTLaw graduates) who are currently working in their field of passion:
Joseph Cheng—Department of Justice
Nader Hasan—Stockwoods Barristers
Dan Rohde—Income Security Advocacy Centre
Cara Zwibel—Canadian Civil Liberties Association
A question and answer period will be included.
Date: 2 March 2017
Time: 12:30 to 2:00pm
Location: J125
Jackman Law Building

A light lunch will be served.
For more information, please contact tal.schreier@utoronto.ca

Constitutional Roundtable - Jamie Cameron
2017-03-22 12:30 - 14:00
CONSTITUTIONAL ROUNDTABLE
presents
Jamie Cameron
York University Osgoode Hall Law School
Section 7 and the Idea of the Charter
Wednesday, March 22, 2017
12:30 – 2:00
Solarium (room FA2), Falconer Hall
84 Queen’s Park
This presentation/paper looks at the idea of the Charter through a s.7 lens. As such, it treats s.7 as a metaphor – as the metaphor – for the central methodological, interpretative, and institutional challenges of Charter decision-making. Section 7 exemplifies the most difficult questions the Supreme Court of Canada has had to consider and has generated the most provocative jurisprudence among the guarantees. Issues of a methodological, doctrinal, and theoretical nature are engaged by s.7 in distinctive ways which nonetheless reflect back on and illustrate Charter themes of general application.
Jamie Cameron is a Professor of Law and has been on the full-time faculty at Osgoode Hall Law School since 1984. She holds law degrees from McGill University and Columbia University, clerked at the Supreme Court of Canada for the Hon. Justice Brian Dickson, and was on the faculty at Cornell Law School before joining Osgoode. Her teaching and research interests include constitutional and Charter law, American constitutional law, criminal law, the Charter’s fundamental freedoms, and s.7’s principles of fundamental justice. In addition to her own scholarship she has organized many conference and events, was editor-in-chief of the Osgoode Hall Law Journal (2006-9), and has been the editor and co-editor of a dozen book collections, including the annual Constitutional Cases volumes, The Charter’s Impact on the Criminal Justice System, Reflections on the Legacy of Justice Bertha Wilson, and The Charter and Criminal Justice: Twenty-Five Years Later.
A light lunch will be provided.
For more information, contact tal.schreier@utoronto.ca

Clinical Course Application Deadline
2017-06-30
Deadline for U of T Upper Year Law students to apply for the Asper Centre clinical courses for 2017.
For more information, see the course list on the Faculty of Law website HERE.

Deadline for Submission of Proposal for Asper Centre 2017-2018 Student Working Group
2017-08-15
U of T law students can become involved in the Centre’s work through volunteering with one of our Working Groups.
For information on how to apply to lead a Working Group read the Proposal Requirements below.
If you would like to apply but need some ideas, contact Cheryl Milne or Tal Schreier by email.
This year, in addition to Working Group ideas developed by students, the Asper Centre invites and welcomes proposals from students who would be interested in leading a children’s rights working group, or a social media working group that would assist the Asper Centre in developing web-based and social media based material focused on constitutional issues.
Working Group Proposal Requirements

Application Deadline for Asper Centre Work-Study student
2017-09-13
The Asper Centre is looking for a student to provide research and technical support for the Centre’s website and social media (Facebook and Twitter). The position involves some research and drafting for content to be uploaded to the Centre’s website related to Canadian constitutional law and the activities of the Centre (primarily case summaries). Training will be provided in respect to website; therefore, in-depth knowledge of website development, maintenance and design, although helpful, is not required. Apply by September 13th 2017 at 5:00 p.m. through the University’s Career Centre page: http://cln.utoronto.ca (Job No. 101096).

Asper Centre & IHRP Student Working Group Information Session
2017-09-19 12:30 - 14:00 | J250 Jackman Law Building
JD students in all years can volunteer with one of the Asper Centre student working groups, that are led by upper year students. Working groups prepare policy briefs, organize workshops, and conduct research on emerging constitutional issues.
This year, there are three Asper Centre student working groups:

The Refugee and Immigration Law working group
The Indigenous Rights working group
Police Oversight working group

Find out more about these working groups at the Asper Centre & IHRP (International Human Rights Program) Student Working Group Information Session on September 19, 2017 at 12:30PM in J250 in the Jackman law building.

Constitutional Roundtable: Richard Albert
2017-09-27 12:30 - 14:00
CONSTITUTIONAL ROUNDTABLE
presents
Richard Albert
Professor, Boston College Law School
The Most Powerful Court in the World?
Constitutional Amendment after the Senate Reform and Supreme Court Act References
Discussant:
Associate Professor Yasmin Dawood
Canada Research Chair in Democracy, Constitutionalism & Electoral Law
University of Toronto
Wednesday, September 27, 2017
12:30 – 2:00PM
Solarium (room FA2), Falconer Hall
84 Queen’s Park
The Supreme Court of Canada has grown since Confederation from supreme in name alone into the guardian of Canada’s constitutional identity, joining high courts in Colombia, India, Israel, Germany, South Africa and the United States in contention for the title of the most powerful court in the world. Over the decades since its creation in 1875, the Canadian Supreme Court has acquired increasing importance in constitutional law and politics as a result of both constitutional design and the gradual accretion of authority that derives from reasoned judgments, legislative deference and public support. As the Constitution of Canada marks its sesquicentennial, the Supreme Court has acquired a new power that will make it the gatekeeper to constitutional reform in the years ahead: the power to rule whether a proposed constitutional amendment is constitutional.
The recent Senate Reform and Supreme Court Act References reveal the blueprint for how the Court will exercise this extraordinary power under its reference jurisdiction in future litigation challenging the validity of a proposed constitutional amendment: the Court will determine which of the five procedures in Canada’s amending formula political actors must use to formalize any proposed amendment. The source of the Court’s new power is the doctrine and theory of the Constitution’s “architecture”—the Court’s own innovation whose content and boundaries are determined by the Court alone, even where the proposed amendment may affect the Court itself.
Richard Albert is a tenured Associate Professor and Nicholson Scholar at Boston College Law School. His scholarship focuses on constitutional amendment in comparative, doctrinal, historical and theoretical perspectives. He is currently writing a book on constitutional amendment, to be published by Oxford University Press. He is also co-editor of the forthcoming volumes: Canada in the World: Comparative Perspectives on the Canadian Constitution (Cambridge), The Foundations and Traditions of Constitutional Amendment (Hart), and the Oxford Handbook of Caribbean Constitutions (Oxford). A former law clerk to the Chief Justice of Canada, Richard Albert holds degrees in law and political science from Yale, Oxford and Harvard.
A light lunch will be provided.
For more information, please contact Nadia Gulezko at n.gulezko@utoronto.ca.

Summer Fellowship Information Session
2017-10-19 12:30 - 14:00 | J250 Jackman Law Building
Introduction to Asper Centre and IHRP Summer Fellowship Opportunities
For current JD students: please attend this information session to learn more about the Asper Centre Summer Fellowship opportunities.

Date: October 19, 2017
Time: 12:30-2:00pm
Location: J250

Constitutional Roundtable Series presents: Constitutional Law Symposium for Canada's Sesquicentennial
2017-10-20 09:00 - 16:00 | Jackman Law Building, Faculty of Law, University of Toronto 78 Queen’s Park, Room J140, 78 Queen's Park, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
View our Save the Date Poster
The 2017 Asper Centre Constitutional Roundtable Series presents a
Constitutional Law Symposium for Canada’s Sesquicentennial
The David Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights’ Constitutional Roundtable Series are annual lunchtime discussion forums that provide an opportunity to consider developments in Canadian constitutional theory and practice as well as the emerging field of comparative constitutional law in relation to Canada. This year, to mark Canada’s 150th anniversary of Confederation, our Constitutional Roundtable series theme has focused on the development of Canada’s constitutional and human rights from the British North America Act to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and provides an analysis of constitutional litigation throughout Canada’s history.
On Friday October 20, 2017, the Asper Centre Constitutional Roundtable Series was pleased to present a one-day Constitutional Law Symposium, for Canada’s Sesquicentennial, with a special keynote address delivered by Professor John Borrows, Canada Research Chair in Indigenous Law, Nexen Chair in Indigenous Leadership, University of Victoria.
Full Symposium Agenda available here. List of Abstracts available here.
Summaries available for panel 1, panel 2, and panel 3.

Panel discussion on the Trinity Western University Appeals
2017-11-23 12:30 - 14:00
On November 30th and December 1st 2017, the Supreme Court of Canada will hear two appeals involving Trinity Western University (TWU), a private Christian university in British Columbia wishing to open a new law school. The appeals involve legal challenges to decisions by the law societies of British Columbia and Ontario and the impact of a policy that requires TWU students to sign a code of conduct forbidding sexual intimacy outside heterosexual marriage. Ontario decided to deny the accreditation of TWU law graduates in the future, while BC approved accreditation. The cases are expected to “break new constitutional ground” around how administrative decision-makers are to balance the competing Charter rights of equality and freedom of religion.
The David Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights, Out in Law, The Journal of Law and Equality and the Dean’s Emerging Issues Workshop Series are delighted to jointly present a panel discussion on November 23, 2017 at 12h30 to consider and analyse some of the main issues that will be covered in these appeals, including the administrative law matters, the balancing of competing rights and the unique circumstances involving the involvement of public interest interveners at the Supreme Court.

Panelists: Professor Richard Stacey (UofT Law), Professor Denise Reaume (UofT Law), Professor Richard Moon (Windsor Law) and Cheryl Milne (Executive Director of the Asper Centre, UofT Law). The Panel will be moderated by Maryam Shahid (UofT Law JD Candidate and Co-Editor of the Journal of Law and Equality).
A pizza lunch will be provided.

Constitutional Roundtable: Alistair Price
2017-11-29 12:30 - 14:00 | Jackman Law Building Room J140, 78 Queen’s Park
Asper Centre Constitutional Roundtable
presents
ALISTAIR PRICE
Associate Professor in Law, University of Cape Town
“The Relationship between Constitutional and Tort Damages for State Failures to Protect in Canada, England, and South Africa”
Moderated by:
Assistant Professor Richard Stacey
University of Toronto Faculty of Law
Wednesday, November 29, 2017
12:30 – 2:00
Solarium (Room FA2), Falconer Hall
84 Queen’s Park
Canada, England, and South Africa face a similar challenge arising from their shared Diceyan heritage in public law. On the one hand, public bodies and officials in these jurisdictions are bound by the ordinary law of the land applied by ordinary courts, including the private law of tort. On the other hand, the state also owes positive obligations to provide a range of services and protections to members of the public that individuals do not bear, arising from constitutional and administrative law. Where the state breaches its distinctive responsibilities by failing to protect an individual, who as a result is harmed and seeks recompense, a question arises as to the proper law to apply. What then is the relationship between the state’s duties and liabilities in tort and constitutional law? The three legal systems under consideration have answered this question in subtly different ways. The English courts have been unwilling to adjust private law to take account of the state’s special duties. In tort law, public defendants are held to the same standards as private individuals, who are liable for omissions only exceptionally. State liability for breach of positive duties to protect human rights arises instead under the Human Rights Act 1998, where courts have a discretion to award compensation alongside declarations and other public-law remedies. South Africa, by contrast, has to a large extent fused private law and constitutional law in this context. Novel private law duties and liabilities may be grounded on the need to hold the state accountable for breaching positive constitutional duties. As a result, the standalone remedy of constitutional damages is comparatively underdeveloped. Canada, it appears to me, has avoided both extremes: the courts have developed a narrow range of uniquely public duties of care in tort while also recognising that constitutional damages may be just and appropriate to compensate loss, vindicate rights, or deter Charter violations where tort (and other) remedies are insufficient. These varying responses to a shared challenge bring the following issue into sharp focus: to what extent can and should tort law be instrumentalised to serve the social goals of constitutional law?
Alistair Price is an Associate Professor in the Department of Private Law at the University of Cape Town (UCT). He received a BBusSc (distinction) and LLB (magna cum laude) from UCT, a Bachelor of Civil Law (distinction) from University College, Oxford, and a PhD from Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge. His thesis was entitled The Influence of Human Rights on State Negligence Liability in England and South Africa and, in 2014, he was awarded a prestigious Yorke Prize by the Cambridge Law Faculty for making ‘a substantial contribution’ to knowledge. Before his appointment at UCT, he worked as a research clerk for Chief Justice Pius Langa at the Constitutional Court of South Africa and as a research assistant to Professor Reinhard Zimmermann at the Max Planck Institute for Private Law in Hamburg, and taught tort law for several colleges at Cambridge University. Research interests: the law of obligations (primarily delict/tort); constitutional and administrative law; comparative law.
A light lunch will be provided.
For more information, please contact Nadia Gulezko at n.gulezko@utoronto.ca.

Asper Centre Public Interest Litigation Conference: Call for Papers DUE DATE
2017-11-30
The David Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights is pleased to invite abstract submissions for our upcoming Public Interest Litigation Conference, which will be held on March 2, 2018. The Conference will be focused on legal strategies for successful public interest litigation in Canada, as a means to bring together relevant stakeholders to share their challenges, successes and strategies in this field.
Please find below the call for papers. We invite proposals for papers in 2 formats: a longer paper covering pertinent issues related to public interest litigation in Canada and a shorter paper focused on lessons learned from a specific public interest case. We hope that together these streams will generate positive response among both practitioners (lawyers and NGOs) who are engaged in public interest litigation and scholars who study and analyze the impact of these cases.
As indicated in the call for papers, please submit proposals to tal.schreier@utoronto.ca by November 30, 2017.
We look forward to receiving your applications and to hosting you in March!
Sincerely,
The David Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights
Public Interest Litigation Conference – CALL FOR PAPERS
