In the wake of the controversy surrounding Toronto’s Mayor Rob Ford, there has been considerable attention on what legal grounds allow for the removal of an elected mayor from office. This C.E.D post provides an overview of grounds for removal. Interestingly, Ontario is one of the few jurisdictions where a criminal conviction alone is insufficient to remove a member of council or a mayor. However, being unable to vote in a municipal election disqualifies a person from holding office, and persons serving penal sentences are not permitted to vote in municipal elections. Therefore, a member of council or a mayor who is serving a penal sentence may be removed from office on the ground of being ineligible to vote in a municipal election.

Senten, Re | 2011 CarswellOnt 13104 | Reg. Scott W. Nettie

On October 18, the Supreme Court of Canada released Cuthbertson v. Rasouli, 2013 CarswellOnt 14113, a decision affirming that a physician must obtain the consent of a patient’s substitute decision maker in order to withdraw life support. If the substitute decision maker refuses to give consent, the physician may challenge the refusal before the Consent and Capacity Board. The following excerpt contains a detailed overview of the law concerning the treatment of patients who are mentally incapable of providing consent.

Quiring v. Ontario (Director, Ministry of the Environment) (2013) | 2013 CarswellOnt 583 | Marcia Valiante (Member)

"[I]t would be at least counterintuitive for a “base” or “pedestal” to be more prominent than what it is supporting."

The duty to consult is a critical issue in the law governing the relationship between the Crown and Aboriginal peoples in Canada. This month's excerpt is an explanation of this important topic from the newly published Aboriginal Law title of the Canadian Encyclopedic Digest.

[a] long, difficult and often bloody struggle between the Crown and Parliament culminated in the victory of the Parliamentarians in the so-called “Glorious Revolution”

Human Rights is a rich and complex area of law within Canadian jurisprudence. One distinguishing feature of human rights legislation is its “quasi-constitutional” status, which is associated with special rules of statutory interpretation. This post provides a concise summary of those rules, as well as a discussion of constitutional aspects of human rights law, and the burden of proof on human rights claimants.

Over the course of the three and a half years of play, one particular manoeuvre of the dealer drew frequent comments and complaints.

What's the difference between "referred to" and "considered" in KeyCite?