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 at Law Clubs week
2016-09-13
Visit the Asper Centre’s information booth to learn more about our work.

(2016)

Asper Centre Information Session
2016-09-15 12:30 (America/Toronto)
Learn how to apply for an Asper Centre summer fellowship to work in an organization within Canada that focuses on constitutional / human rights advocacy.

(2016)

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)

Asper Centre and Aboriginal Law Program Presentation: Dr. Sarah Marie Wiebe
2016-11-14 12:30 - 14:00
Indigenous Mobilization and Environmental Justice in Canada
In Aamjiwnaang First Nation (near Sarnia, Ontario) the female to male birthrate is 2:1. Community members experience abnormal incidences of miscarriage, asthma, cancer, cardiovascular and respiratory illnesses. This workshop will explore if law has thus far failed this community and what Canadian and Indigenous governments are doing now to protect the land.
Monday, November 14, 2016
12:30pm – 2:00pm
Jackman Law Building J125
University of Toronto Faculty of Law
78 Queens Park, Toronto
Light lunch will be provided
Dr. Sarah Marie Wiebe, Assistant Teaching Professor at the University of Victoria and SSHRC Post-Doctoral Fellow, will lead students through a conversation covering:

The chemical manufacturing around Aamjiwnaang First Nation and the damage it has done to the land and community members
Canada’s dark legacy of inflicting harm on Indigenous bodies and how the system fails to adequately address health and ecological suffering
The challenges jurisdictional issues pose for the creation of sound environmental justice policy
The clash between Indigenous and scientific knowledge
The 2011 Chemical Valley Charter challenge brought by two members of Aamjiwnaang First Nation and Ecojustice which was, in April 2016, withdrawn

Please RSVP so we have enough food!
To RSVP or for further information, please contact Amanda Carling at amanda.carling@utoronto.ca

Constitutional Roundtable - Claudia Geiringer
2016-11-16 12:30 - 14:00 | Jackman Law Building Room J140, 78 Queen’s Park
CONSTITUTIONAL ROUNDTABLE
presents
Claudia Geiringer (Victoria University of Wellington School of Law, New Zealand)
moderated by Professor Kent Roach
Wednesday November 16, 2016 12:30 PM to 2:00 PM
Falconer Hall Solarium (room FA2)
84 Queen’s Park
Topic: The Strange Antipodean Afterlife of John Hart Ely’s Democracy and Distrust
This paper tells the strange, and little known, story of how John Hart Ely’s process-perfecting theory of constitutional interpretation (of the United States Constitution) became a blueprint for the design of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. The paper reflects on Ely’s antipodean afterlife as an instance of the migration of constitutional ideas. It examines the processes of de- and re-contextualization by which Ely’s theory was remodelled and repurposed, during the process of migration, in order to re-fit it for the new legal system. And it suggests that this process of transmogrification augmented the problems of coherence already associated with Ely’s theory. The paper will be of relevance both to those constitutional theorists with an interest in the coherence and legitimacy of process theories generally, and to scholars of comparative constitutional law, who care about the pathways by which constitutional ideas migrate between legal systems.
Professor Claudia Geiringer holds the Chair in Public Law at Victoria University of Wellington School of Law, and is the Co-Director of the New Zealand Centre of Public Law. Her research interests include the constitutional protection of human rights in New Zealand and comparator Commonwealth nations, the laws and procedures of Parliament, and the domestic reception of international law. She currently holds a grant from the Royal Society of New Zealand to write a book on the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act.
A light lunch will be provided.

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.

Senator Kim Pate: "The Need to Correct Corrections: The Case for Judicial Oversight"
2017-10-16 12:30 - 14:00
The David Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights is hosting a lunchtime discussion with Senator Kim Pate.
“The Need to Correct Corrections: The Case for Judicial Oversight“
Monday October 16th at 12:30pm in Jackman Law Building J140
Kim Pate was appointed to the Senate of Canada on November 10, 2016. First and foremost, the mother of Michael and Madison, she is also a nationally renowned advocate who has spent the last 35 years working in and around the legal and penal systems of Canada, with and on behalf of some of the most marginalized, victimized, criminalized and institutionalized — particularly imprisoned youth, men and women.
A light lunch will be provided.
For more information, contact tal.schreier@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

Call for Papers for Public Interest Litigation Conference - Deadline Extension
2018-01-03
We have decided to extend the deadline for our Call for Papers
The new deadline for Abstract submissions for our March 2, 2018 Public Interest Litigation Conference is January 3, 2018.
Please see the extended CALL for PAPERS here.
Many thanks.

TWU Panel discussion with interveners
2018-01-18 18:00 - 21:00 | J250 Jackman Law Building
On Thursday January 18, 2018, Out in Law, the Journal for Law and Equality, the Asper Centre and other groups at the University of Toronto Faculty of Law are pleased to present a debrief panel discussion between a number of interveners in the recent Trinity Western University appeals at the Supreme Court of Canada.
More information here

Constitutional Roundtable: Athanasios (Akis) Psygkas
2018-01-31 12:30 - 14:00 | Jackman Law Building Room J140, 78 Queen’s Park
Constitutional Roundtable Presents
Athanasios (Akis) Psygkas
Lecturer in Law
University of Bristol Law School
on
Wednesday, January 31, 2018
12:30 – 2:00
Solarium (Room FA2), Falconer Hall
84 Queen’s Park
“The hydraulics of constitutional claims: Four models of democratic constitutionalism and same-sex marriage“
With Professor Brenda Cossman, Director of the Bonham Centre for Sexual Diversity Studies as Discussant
——-
Who makes constitutional claims? The paper argues that on both sides of the Atlantic a multiplicity of constitutional actors outside the courts participate in the elaboration of constitutional principles. I map out these constitutional actors by using as a case study the legal recognition of same-sex marriage in the United States, Spain, the United Kingdom, and Ireland. In all four country cases, there are common functional demands for democratic involvement in shaping constitutional meaning. Even though these demands may take various institutional and procedural forms owing to diverse political, institutional, and cultural contexts, I argue that the same overarching hydraulics effect is at play across jurisdictions. When social movements are shut out of one forum, they channel their constitutional claims through different institutional avenues.
The four systems represent distinctive models of formal recognition of same-sex marriage, with different actors taking the lead and having the final say on this contested issue. However, I explain that in all four cases we can detect the voices of multiple actors, including notably the people themselves, in a process of legal contestation around and interpretation of fundamental constitutional principles. These voices can take different forms, and the paper proposes institutional, historical, political, and cultural factors that may account for this. Thus, the paper tells a story of legal development arising from inclusive interpretive communities in the context of a democratic constitutional theory. This facilitates dynamic constitutional interpretation that reflects evolving political and social demands instead of top-down delivery of constitutional meaning.
————
Athanasios (Akis) Psygkas is lecturer in law at the University of Bristol in the UK and currently a visiting scholar at the University of Toronto. His research interests include comparative public law, regulation, and global governance. His latest book, entitled “From the ‘Democratic Deficit’ to a ‘Democratic Surplus’: Constructing Administrative Democracy in Europe” (Oxford University Press, 2017), examines the impact of EU law on the adoption of participatory regulatory processes in the member states.
Akis received J.S.D. and LL.M. degrees from Yale Law School, where he was a Fulbright scholar, and an LL.B. and LL.M. in Public Law and Political Science from the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (Greece). He has held fellowships at the European University Institute in Florence, the Institut d’Etudes Politiques (Sciences Po) in Paris, and Yale. He has been managing the Comparative Administrative Law Blog over the past seven years.
Light Lunch Provided
For further details, please contact tal.schreier@utoronto.ca
No Registration Required

Applications for 2018 Asper Centre Summer Fellowship Position Due
2018-02-20 12:00
Applications for Asper Centre Summer Fellowships are due on February 20, 2018.
Please find the 2018 Asper Centre Fellowship Guide here.
Also, current law students can log into the University of Toronto Law Career Network for further information on the application process.

Public Interest Litigation Conference
2018-03-02 08:30 - 16:30
View CONFERENCE Schedule Here
The Asper Centre convened a one-day Conference on March 2, 2018 focused on legal strategies for successful public interest litigation as a means to bring together relevant stakeholders to share their challenges, successes and strategies in this field. The Conference was aimed at both practitioners (lawyers and NGOs) who are engaged in public interest litigation and scholars and students who study and analyze the impact of these cases.
Over 25 papers in total were presented in 11 concurrent sessions throughout the day.
List of Participating Authors & Papers
1. Alexander, Basil: “Pragmatic Assorted Strategies: How Canadian Cause Lawyering Contributes to Social Change”
2. Anglin, Howard: “Public Interest Case Study: R v Comeau”
3. Bharati, Subodh and David Coté: “Scotland v Attorney General of Canada Case Study”
4. Blum, Joshua: “Ali v Attorney General of Canada Case Study”
5. Bredt, Chris & Ewa Krajewska: “Only 5 Minutes? The Supreme Court’s Approach to Interveners Requires Reform”
6. Bussey, Barry: “The Law of Intervention after the TWU case”
7. Chan, Kathryn & Howard Kislowicz: “Divine Intervention: A study of the operation and impact of NGO interveners in Canadian religious freedom litigation”
8. Giltrow, Maegan and Nathan Hume: “The Shadow Intervener: Economics and Public Interest Litigation”
9. Gold, Richard and Rachel Meland: “Litigating Patents in the Public Interest”
10. Grant, Angus: “Intervener Standing in Immigration and Refugee Cases”
11. Faraday, Fay, Tracy Heffernan & Helen Luu: “Winning the Right to Housing: A Holistic Approach to Public Interest Litigation in Three Voices”
12. Fenske, Allison and Joëlle Pastora Sala: “The Wheels of Justice for Vulnerable Individuals: Reflections from the Public Interest Law Centre of Legal Aid Manitoba”
13. Giorgio, Barbara: “Attorney General of Canada v Downtown Eastside Sex Workers: Judicially Precipitated Reform for Public Interest Advocacy”
14. Ha-Redeye, Omar: “When Public Interest Litigation is used as a Cover for Controversy”
15. Kennedy, Gerard and Lorne Sossin: “Justiciability, Access To Justice and the Development of Constitutional Law In Canada”
16. Laing, Christine: “Does Yaiguaje v Chevron Corporation change the security for costs game for public interest litigants?”
17. Latimer, Alison: “Examination of a Solitary Confinement Test Case”
18. Latner, Gabriel: “The Rights Stuff: Why Canada doesn’t have its own ACLU and how we can build one?”
19. Levesque, Anne: “The symbiotic relationship between social movements and public interest litigation: A case study of the I am a Witness Campaign and the human rights complaint of 165 000 First Nations kid”
20. Davidson, Gail and Gavin Magrath: “Balancing Act: Practical Lessons for Human Rights Interventions”
21. Mangat, Raji: “Here from the beginning: the promise of trial-level intervention”
22. Paterson, Josh: “The Carter case – Sustaining the Fight Both Inside and Outside the Courtroom”
23. Sheldon, Tess and Helgi Maki: “Trauma–Informed Strategies in Public Interest Litigation”
24. Sheppard, Dan: “Just Going Through the Motions: The Supreme Court, Interest Groups and the Performance of Intervention”
25. Silcoff, Maureen: “Party Status in Y.Z. v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)”
26. Spector, Karen: “Legal Strategies for Intervention in Cases Seeking to Advance the Rights of Persons with Mental Health Disabilities”
27. Vaughan, Eleanor: “Solicitor Client Privilege in Lizotte v Aviva Insurance Company of Canada and Alberta (Information and Privacy Commissioner) v University of Calgary”
N.B. Full day attendance at the Conference may qualify for 6.5 Substantive CPD hours. Kindly also note that we have made an application for accreditation of Professionalism CPD hours with the Law Society of Ontario.

Asper Centre Immigration & Refugee Law student working group presents Senator Ratna Omidvar
2018-03-07 12:30 - 14:00 | J140 Jackman Law Building, 78 Queen's Park Cres, Toronto, Ontario, M5S 2C5, Canada
The Asper Centre’s Immigration & Refugee Law Student Working Group is honoured to host Senator Ratna Omidvar for a lunchtime seminar on Wednesday March 7, 2018 at 12h30. All students are welcome and encouraged to attend. Senator Omidvar will share her personal story of coming to Canada from India, and she will discuss issues related to inclusion and diversity in Canada, immigration and refugee law and policy, the Charter and progressive law reform. She will then take questions from the audience. This will be a great opportunity to get some insight from her inspiring career.
Light lunch will be provided
Email tal.schreier@utoronto.ca for further information.
About Senator Omidvar:

The Honourable Ratna Omidvar, C.M., O.Ont.
Senator for Ontario, The Senate of Canada
Ratna Omidvar is an internationally recognized voice on migration, diversity and inclusion. In April 2016, Prime Minister Trudeau appointed Ms. Omidvar to the Senate of Canada as an independent Senator representing Ontario. As a member of the Senate’s Independent Senators Group she holds a leadership position as the Scroll Manager.
Senator Omidvar is the founding Executive Director and currently a Distinguished Visiting Professor at the Global Diversity Exchange (GDX), Ted Rogers School of Management, Ryerson University. GDX is a think-and-do tank on diversity, migration and inclusion that connects local experience and ideas with global networks. Previously, Senator Omidvar was the President of Maytree, where she played a lead role in local, national and international efforts to promote the integration of immigrants.
Senator Omidvar is the current Co-Chair of the Global Future Council on Migration hosted by the World Economic Forum and serves as a Councillor on the World Refugee Council. She is also a director at the Environics Institute, and Samara Canada. Senator Omidvar is the Toronto Region Immigrant Employment Council’s Chair Emerita and was formerly the Chair of Lifeline Syria.
Senator Omidvar is co-author of Flight and Freedom: Stories of Escape to Canada (2015), an Open Book Toronto best book of 2015 and one of the Toronto Star‘s top five good reads from Word on the Street. She is also a contributor to The Harper Factor (2016) and co-editor of Five Good Ideas: Practical Strategies for Non-Profit Success (2011). Senator Omidvar received an Honorary Degree, Doctor of Laws, York University in 2012.
Senator Omidvar was appointed to the Order of Ontario in 2005 and became a Member of the Order of Canada in 2011, with both honours recognizing her advocacy work on behalf of immigrants and devotion to reducing inequality in Canada. In 2014, she received the Cross of the Order of Merit of the Federal Republic of Germany in recognition of her contribution to the advancement of German-Canadian relations.
