The doctrine of unconscionability is an equitable remedy available in exceptional circumstances where a bargain between parties, be it a settlement or a release, may be set aside on the basis that the bargain is unfair to one party.

A gateway issue in automobile coverage and priority dispute cases is whether the policy in question was in effect at the time of loss. If a live issue, it typically involves dispute over whether termination of the policy was valid.

In Royal Bank of Canada v Hussain, 2016 ONCA 637, the plaintiff, Royal Bank, brought an action to recover amounts owed on various loan facilities. The defendants filed a counterclaim. A pre-trial conference was held but did not result in a settlement of the issues. Upon the conclusion of the pre-trial conference, the plaintiff brought a motion for summary judgment.

Note: This article was originally published on the Bennett Jones website. Communications between lawyers and their clients' accountants or other non-legal professionals are not in themselves privileged but can be where the communication is in "furtherance of a function essential to the solicitor-client relationship or the continuum of legal advice provided by the solicitor," the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal recently held in Redhead Equipment v Canada (Attorney General), 2016 SKCA 115.

Sexual harassment and sexual assault within the legal profession are happening far more often than most of us likely want to admit, writes WLF Co-Chair Heidi Schedler. And everyone in the profession has an obligation to make it stop.

The Alberta Court of Appeal began 2015 by approving an Anton Piller order granted despite defective disclosure. The order was obtained initially from the Court of Queen’s Bench in early 2014 and upheld by Justice Hawco on August 7, 2014. Murray A. Harris of McLennan Ross gives us the details.

The application of the principles in the Supreme Court of Canada’s Hryniak ruling has varied greatly from province to province since the decision came down in January 2014, write Kelly Osaka of Osler’s and Brad Vermeersch, who is now with Lax O’Sullivan Scott Lisus. Still, since every province has some form of summary judgment, the ruling has received a great deal of interest from across the country.

Philippe Lalonde, of McLeod Law in Calgary, looks at the Supreme Court’s decision in Canada (Attorney General) v Federation of Law Societies of Canada, which struck down sections of the federal Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act, that would have required lawyers to gather and retain information on their clients.

Philippe Lalonde, with McLeod Law in Calgary looks at the Supreme Court decision in Potter v New Brunswick Legal Aid Services Commission, which clarified and advanced the law of constructive dismissal.

A recent Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench demonstrates that the courts will not award indemnity or penal costs for an abandoned application unless it was conducted in a scandalous manner writes Nabeel Peermohamed of Brownlee LLP.