Articles

Child Refugees and Migrants: the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Kanthasamy v Canada, 2015 SCC 61

Should courts apply a different standard when assessing the necessary mens rea – or criminal intent – to ground a finding of guilt when the defendant is a young person?

What is “child-friendly” justice? How is this concept put into practice and how is it understood by such a wide variety of stakeholders? A view from Uganda.

A child’s wishes, particularly those of an older child, should be considered prior to making an access order. However, once the court has determined that access is in the child’s best interests, a parent cannot leave the decision to comply with the access order up to the child.

On November 19, 2015, the OBA held an event titled “Effective and Ethical Representation of Young People”. The program was co-chaired by section executive members Mary Birdselland Emma Rhodes. This article summarizes the program.

How does a local culture affect the "best interests of the child" consideration as a matter of law? A report from Uganda.

When is it appropriate for a court to appoint amicus curiae to represent parents in a high conflict custody and access case? A case comment on Morwald-Benevides v. Benevides, 2015 ONCJ 532

In Unifund Assurance Company v. D.E. the Ontario Court of Appeal ruled that the parents of a school-age bully are not covered for their negligent supervision under their home insurance policy.