Evolution of the Law in 2005

The law is something that is ever-changing.  It evolves as legislators pass new laws and also by the cases that create changes in our common law.  Here are some significant changes in our law that occurred in the last year:

The Courts have now decreed something we already knew:  politicians’ promises are worthless.  That is, you can’t sue them if they break their promises.  Something to think about during an election, isn’t it?

The laws have changed to ban gender-based pricing.  In other words, it is illegal to charge women more than men for the same service.  While I think the concept is useful, the law permits too much room to dance around it.  Why does a woman’s haircut cost four times mine?  The salons will argue that they wash, style and blow-dry their client’s hair, making the service “not the same”.

We learned that the standard for bottling water in Ontario is perfection, at least according to one case that I hope and pray is being appealed.  You may recall the Mustaphas, who saw a dead fly floating in their bottle of Culligan water.  Mrs. Mustapha tossed her cookies immediately and Mr. Mustapha apparently needed psychiatric counselling before he could use his (non-Culligan water) shower again.  If the appeal is not successful, the law of product liability will be drastically changed, with the standards for product quality nearing perfection.

The BC government created a law that changed the rules to make it easier for it to sue Big Tobacco.  The Supreme Court said that was OK.  That, as a concept, is quite scary.  Effectively, the government can make its own rules if it wants to sue you.  The ends can never justify the means and, in this case, it would have been whole lot smarter and easier if the BC government had just raised taxes on tobacco.

The case of Terry Schiavo, while not changing any law (it could have if it had gone the other way) taught us how important estate planning is.

The failed attempt to restrict Karla Homolka’s freedom was a lesson that the law is not to be abused to try to fix past “mistakes”. 

The hilarious case of Tuxedo the dog reminded us that animals are personal property and are not children, no matter how much we baby them. 

What’s coming down the pipe in 2006?

The Supreme Court of Canada is set to hear the case of Zoe Childs, which is a case on social host liability, on January18.  You should expect to hear about it in the news then, but don’t expect a judgment until several months later.  This case will, hopefully, clear the air with respect to social host liability and, I hope, will not change the current state of the law.

I wish all of you a Happy and litigation-free New Year!  I resolve to do my best to inform, advise and entertain you with the fascinating field law as it evolves during the next year.