BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//David Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights - ECPv6.15.20//NONSGML v1.0//EN
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
X-ORIGINAL-URL:https://aspercentre.ca
X-WR-CALDESC:Events for David Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights
REFRESH-INTERVAL;VALUE=DURATION:PT1H
X-Robots-Tag:noindex
X-PUBLISHED-TTL:PT1H
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:America/Toronto
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:-0500
TZOFFSETTO:-0400
TZNAME:EDT
DTSTART:20100314T070000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:-0400
TZOFFSETTO:-0500
TZNAME:EST
DTSTART:20101107T060000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:-0500
TZOFFSETTO:-0400
TZNAME:EDT
DTSTART:20110313T070000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:-0400
TZOFFSETTO:-0500
TZNAME:EST
DTSTART:20111106T060000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:-0500
TZOFFSETTO:-0400
TZNAME:EDT
DTSTART:20120311T070000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:-0400
TZOFFSETTO:-0500
TZNAME:EST
DTSTART:20121104T060000
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20111104
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20111106
DTSTAMP:20260419T095903
CREATED:20170621T150054Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20170621T150054Z
UID:910-1320364800-1320537599@aspercentre.ca
SUMMARY:Reference Re Assisted Human Reproduction Act
DESCRIPTION:Implications of the Supreme Court’s Decision \nNovember 4-5\, 2011 \nBennett Lecture Hall\nFaculty of Law\nUniversity of Toronto\n78 Queen’s Park Cres\, Toronto\, ON \nThe 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? \nKeynote 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. \nSpeakers 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. \nTopics covered will include:\nGeneral overview of the case\nQuebec’s arguments for the challenge\nUse of the criminal law power\nInternational perspectives\nMoral dimensions of AHR; why is AHR practice different from general medical practice\nAHRA and reproductive rights; rights of children\nImplications for the current federal regulatory state\nCurrent legal landscape and it practical implications for lawyers\, medical practitioners and families. \nRegistration Fee: $200.00 (reduced rates for students\, government and NGOs -click on REGISTRATION below for details). \nPROGRAM FLYER\nCONFERENCE AGENDA\nREGISTRATION IS NOW CLOSED
URL:https://aspercentre.ca/event/reference-re-assisted-human-reproduction-act/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Toronto:20111104T122000
DTEND;TZID=America/Toronto:20111104T135000
DTSTAMP:20260419T095903
CREATED:20170621T150156Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20170721T161220Z
UID:914-1320409200-1320414600@aspercentre.ca
SUMMARY:Free Brown Bag Lunch Discussion
DESCRIPTION:Reference re. Assisted Human Reproduction Act\nImplications of the Supreme Court’s Decision\nThe 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? What are the ethical and policy issues in the context of AHR and how can federal and provincial governments adequately deal with them? \nJoin us for a free lunchtime discussion with Preston Manning\, Carolyn Bennett\, Peter Hogg\nand Alison Motluk moderated by Steve Paikin\, anchor and senior editor\nThe Agenda with Steve Paikin \nFriday\, November 4\, 2011 \n12:20-1:50 p.m. \nBennett Lecture Hall\, Flavelle House \nFaculty of Law\, University of Toronto \n(bring your own lunch)
URL:https://aspercentre.ca/event/free-brown-bag-lunch-discussion/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Toronto:20111109T123000
DTEND;TZID=America/Toronto:20111109T140000
DTSTAMP:20260419T095903
CREATED:20170621T175820Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20170621T175820Z
UID:1021-1320841800-1320847200@aspercentre.ca
SUMMARY:Catholic Schools and Gay Students Associations
DESCRIPTION:CONSTITUTIONAL ROUNDTABLE\nCo-sponsored by Out in Law \nSpeakers: R. Douglas Elliott\, Noa Mendelsohn Aviv\, Robert Keel \nMonday\, November 28\, 2011\n12:30 – 2:00\nBennett Lecture Hall\, Flavelle House\n78 Queen’s Park \nRecently\, gay students within Ontario’s Catholic school system have encountered problems that raise legal and constitutional concerns. When students at a high school in the Dufferin-Peel school board district in Mississauga tried to start a gay-straight alliance (GSA) in their high school\, their principal prohibited it. At the nearby Halton Catholic District School Board\, trustees removed the term “sexual orientation” from a draft text of the board’s anti-discrimination policy. After intense public pressure\, they returned “sexual orientation” to the policy\, but they still refuse to allow GSAs. What options are available to gay students under these circumstances? Do the students have rights to form these clubs? Do they have other options to make their lives easier as do their peers in non-Catholic public schools? Do the Catholics schools have any responsibilities to these students as gay students or can they take the positions they have taken without repercussions? What is the legal framework for the Catholic school boards’ position? What arguments support this position? What arguments support the gay students’ claims? \nBob Keel is a senior founding Partner of Keel Cottrelle LLP. Bob is qualified in both Ontario and New York State. Bob has appeared before all levels of the Courts\, including the Supreme Court of Canada\, as well as numerous administrative tribunals. At present\, his practice is primarily focused on Education Law\, including First Nations Governance issues. In particular\, Bob has acted on a number of constitutional and human rights cases involving the Charter and/or Human Rights Code. Bob is also presently acting for a number of Catholic District School Boards with respect to the Ministry of Education’s Equity Initiative and\, in particular\, the issue of Gay and Lesbian Clubs and/or Associations. Bob has spoken at more than 100 conferences and has published more than 100 papers or articles. In addition\, Bob is the President of Edu-Law Consulting Services Limited\, which provides Conflict Resolution programs for the education sector. Bob is the Executive Editor of the Keel Cottrelle LLP Education Law Newsletter\, Human Resources Newsletter\, and Public Sector Procurement Law Newsletter. He is also the author of Student Rights and Responsibilities: Attendance and Discipline (1998)\, the co author of An Educator’s Guide to Managing Sexual Misconduct in Schools (2003)\, An Educator’s Guide to Parental Harassment (2005) and An Educator’s Guide to the Health and Safety of Students\, (2010). \nDouglas Elliott is a founding partner in the law firm of Roy Elliott O’Connor LLP. As one of Canada’s leading human rights lawyers\, he has helped to win many important cases for Canada’s LGBT communities\, including Vriend v Alberta\, M. v H.\, Halpern v Canada\, Hislop v Canada and the Reference Re Same Sex Marriage. In the case of Marc Hall v. Durham Catholic School Board\, Douglas represented the Coalition in Support of Marc Hall\, a diverse group that included\, among others\, Egale\, Canadian Auto Workers and Catholics for Choice. In 2010 Douglas became the first lawyer to be honoured with the Law Society Medal for advancing LGBT rights. \nNoa Mendelsohn Aviv\, Director\, Equality program\, Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA). As Director of CCLA’s Equality Program\, Noa works on such issues as protections for migrants and refugees; healthcare; LGBTQ rights; race and gender issues; mental health and prisons; and generally the rights of persons who are marginalized or disadvantaged. Noa has also served as CCLA’s Freedom of Expression Project Director\, and dealt extensively with free speech\, freedom of the press\, and freedom of religion. In the effort to promote and protect rights and freedoms in Canada\, Noa has been involved with numerous CCLA interventions in the courts – including the Supreme Court of Canada\, and has made submissions to various governmental\, legislative and public bodies. She has also addressed various groups and has spoken out frequently in the media. In addition\, Noa is an integral member of CCLET’s public education project\, engaging students at schools and faculties of education in discussions on the challenges of civil liberties. \nA light lunch will be served.
URL:https://aspercentre.ca/event/catholic-schools-and-gay-students-associations/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Toronto:20111123T123000
DTEND;TZID=America/Toronto:20111123T140000
DTSTAMP:20260419T095903
CREATED:20170621T145852Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20170621T145908Z
UID:907-1322051400-1322056800@aspercentre.ca
SUMMARY:Lawyers and the Media – In the Public Interest
DESCRIPTION:The media often shows intense interest in the court cases that shape social policy in Canada. Constitutional and human rights related cases such as the recent Insite decision (Canada (Attorney General) v PHS Community Services Society)\, the Polygamy Reference Case\, Bedford v Canada (prostitution challenge)\, as well as a number of national security cases have been reported on\, debated and championed by journalists and commentators in all forms of media across Canada. What is the role that lawyers play in the public debate of the issues in the cases? To what extent do the media influence the outcomes\, if at all? How can the media’s interpretation of decisions affect public perception?\nA significant concern for lawyers acting in such public interest cases is how to effectively communicate their client’s issues to the media\, or whether to do so at all. What do you do when a reporter calls? What are the professional responsibilities of lawyers to their clients\, as officers of the court and to the administration of justice when talking to reporters? How is it different if you act for the government? How can lawyers effectively work with the media in the public interest? \nPanel:\nJulian Falconer\, Partner\, Falconer Charney LLP\nUrszula Kaczmarczyk\, Senior General Counsel\, Immigration Law Division\, Department of Justice\nTracey Tyler\, Legal Affairs Reporter\, The Toronto Star\nProfessor David Schneiderman\, Faculty of Law\, University of Toronto\nModerator: Paul Schabas\, Partner\, Blake Cassels & Graydon LLP \nThis program has been accredited by the Law Society for 1.0 Professionalism Hours and 1.5 New Member CPD Hours. \nA light lunch will be served. \n  \nEvent date: Wednesday\, November 23\, 2011\, from 12:30 PM to 2:00 PM\nLocation: Room FLB\, Flavelle House\, Faculty of Law\, University of Toronto
URL:https://aspercentre.ca/event/lawyers-and-the-media-in-the-public-interest/
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR