1. No category

QUID
NOVI
Journal des étudiant-e-s
en droit de l’université McGill
Published by the McGill Law
Students’ Association
Volume 36, no 13
3 février 2015 | February 3, 2015
Édition spéciale - Special Issue
CURRICULUM RENEWAL
QUID
NOVI
QUID NOVI
3644 Peel Street
Montréal, Québec H2A 1X1
[email protected]
http://quid.mcgill.ca/
http://www.quidnovi.ca
EDITORS IN CHIEF
Melissa Cederqvist
Ying Cheng
Nathan Cudicio
IN-HOUSE DIVA EMERITUS
Charlie Feldman
LAYOUT EDITORS
Fortunat Nadima
Sunny Yang
Journal des étudiant-e-s
en droit de l’université McGill
McGill Law’s Weekly Student Newspaper
Volume 36, no 13
3 février 2015 | February 3, 2015
What’s inside ?
Quel est le contenu ?
ÉDITO3
CURRICULAR RENEWAL OF THE BCL/LLB PROGRAM
4
LES ATTENTES ET LE BIEN-ÊTRE
5
ON ARCHITECTURE - THOUGHTS ON CURRICULUM REFORM
6
BLSAM, RADLAW AND WOCC JOINT STATEMENT
8
CURRICULUM RENEWAL: A RESPONSE
13
SAO CORNER
16
RÉFLEXIONS SUR LA RÉFORME DU CURRICULUM
18
EXPERIENTAL (NOT EXPLOITATIVE) EDUCATION
21
THINKING ABOUT EQUITY AND INCLUSION
25
LIBRARY NEWS
26
ASSOCIATE REVIEWERS
Pouneh Davar-Ardakani
Kaishan He
Lindsay Little
Elspeth McMurray
Samantha Rudolph
David Searle
Andrew Stuart
STAFF WRITERS
Linda Agaby
Allison Render
Samantha Rudolph
Suzanne Zaccour
Want to talk ?
Tu veux t’exprimer ?
Envoyez vos commentaires ou articles avant
jeudi 17h à l’adresse : [email protected]
Toute contribution doit indiquer le nom de
l’auteur, son année d’étude ainsi qu’un titre
pour l’article. L’article ne sera publié qu’à la
discrétion du comité de rédaction, qui
basera sa décision sur la politique de
rédaction.
Quid Novi is published by the McGill Law
Students' Association, a student society
of McGill University. The content of this
publication is the sole responsibility of
the McGill Law Students' Association
and does not necessarily represent the
views of McGill University.
Contributions should preferably be submitted
as a .doc attachment (and not, for instance,
a “.docx.”).
The Quid Novi is published weekly by the students of the Faculty of Law at McGill University. Production is made possible through the direct support of students. All contents copyright 2015 Quid Novi. Les opinions exprimées sont propres aux auteurs et ne réflètent pas nécessairement celles de l’équipe du Quid Novi. The content of this publication does not
necessarily reflect the views of the McGill Law Students’ Association or of McGill University.
Co-editor-in-chief
melissa
cederqvist
The words and worlds we’RE TAUGHT
After the Quid was chosen as the platform of communication
about curriculum reform, the team had the pleasure this week of
opening up our mailbox to a deluge of comments. Now, normally we’re happy because the Faculty is the natural habitat of
many interesting people with interesting ideas who like to write
and rant within our pages. This Edition was somewhat special,
however, because the topic includes everyone in a common discussion. This discussion concerned what we’re taught and how
we’re taught it. In a heavier word taken straight from the depths
of various high school memories, “curriculum”.
Curriculum reform means deciding what will be included in
the study of law, and then passed along to generations of law
students. It is important because inclusion of certain perspectives amounts to the omission of others. Furthermore, because
nothing is value-neutral, the composition of chosen perspectives
will always be ideological. All of this makes what would otherwise be an administrative question take on a larger significance.
We need to be on the lookout for some assumptions. The idea
that students are just passive receptacles for the content of
their courses should be rejected. Learning is always a dynamic
process, though the degree of dynamism varies. We all weigh
what we’re taught with what we know, and weigh what seems
true in theory with what has always proven true in reality. This is
precisely where differences in lived experience produce different
critiques of the law.
Conversely it must be recognized that as law students our primary points of contact with the law are our professors, each other,
and the course material. The information that gets included by
those sources determines much of how we view the law and
how we see our future role as legal actors.
When studying codes, precedents and legal rules, there is
immense significance in the subversive. The questioning of
assumptions—like what is the moral difference between individual murders and large-scale state-sanctioned homicide—like
would you defend the property rights of a billionaire against the
needs of a thousand starving people—leads us to see the bigger
picture rather than being consumed in a myopic obsession with
process.
ghout history. In science fiction, for instance, alternate visions of
the future can serve to reconcile contemporary pessimism with
humanist idealism. In the same way, sharing stories of how law
actually affects people can peel away assumptions about its real
function and effects.
This is what makes troubling the tendency to present critical legal theory, critical race theory, and feminist theory as somehow
supplementary rather than as necessary tools for understanding
law. Side-lining these perspectives sets up the “basic” legal ideas
and concepts as value-neutral. But what is more important for
a law student than understanding the enormous gap between
formal equality and substantive equality?
The perspectives in the following pages raise even more questions which will hopefully provoke some response among
students. That the Faculty of Law is “reaching out to the current
cohort of law students” means an opening for students to think
critically about course content.
A few reflections on this particular week’s edition being chosen
as the platform for consultation: the Quid team realizes that
many students did not have the time to thoroughly read, process
and write a response between the release date of the report in
mid-January and last week’s submission deadline. The missing
voices of these students are important and are definitely welcome in upcoming editions, but hopefully they are still considered in the process as well. Also, is the Quid is enough? Additional
forums would allow greater representation of student perspectives. Finally, the way in which these perspectives actually get
integrated into the final reforms should be clarified so students
understand how to track their input and see how it is included
in the end product. If students are to take the time to form and
express their positions, they need to know how these will be
influential.
Hopefully all of this means that the fifteen-page report sits
somewhere between your highlighted codal articles and your
stained coffee mug, read three times over, and annotated. It
hopefully also shows that students have a right to voice their
opinion in what they are taught. Missed submitting last week?
Do not dispair! Your student weekly remains open-doors for your
reflections. With that in mind, enjoy!
Disrupting ideological narratives with alternate perspectives,
truths and facts, has been the role of certain genres of art throu-
QN • 3 FEB 2015 • 3
Professor
CURRICULAR RENEWAL OF THE
BCL/LLB PROGRAM
hoi
kong
The Faculty of Law has long been committed to innovation in
legal education with an emphasis on civic engagement, critical
reasoning, and the crossing of jurisdictional, disciplinary, linguistic, and cultural boundaries.
While a diversity of voices and opinions were heard at the
January 27 consultation, many perspectives were missing. In an
effort to design an interactive roundtable consultation, attendance was limited to 40 participants. Working with this number,
attempts were made to include both student and non-student
L’exemplaire programme transystémique de McGill a été introduit stakeholders representing a variety of interests, constituencies,
en 1999. Au cours des 15 dernières années, il a évolué dans plu- and perspectives. However, the consultation was only part of
sieurs directions face à des changements dans l’environnement
what the Faculty hopes will be an ongoing conversation among
de l’éducation juridique. In light of these developments, Faculty
the members of our community over the coming weeks.
Council passed resolutions in April 2014 in support of curricular
renewal of the BCL/LLB program.
This special issue of the Quid Novi on curricular renewal is meant
to provide an additional and valuable space for students to share
Stakeholders in the future of the McGill program have an essen- their reflections within the Faculty. Just as the ideas raised at the
tial role to play in the curricular renewal process. Students in par- January 27 consultation will be communicated to the Curriculum
ticular have important experiences to share and vital suggestions Committee, so too will the contributions to this special issue will
for the improvement of the program. Recognizing the need to
be carefully considered and inform the decision-making process
create spaces for different stakeholders to express their ideas and of the Committee. This is a unique moment in the Faculty’s hisconcerns about reforms to the BCL/LLB program, a consultation
tory and we hope you will to contribute to the ongoing dialogue
event was held in Thomson House on January 27, 2015. Plusieurs about the future of the McGill BCL/LLB.
participants ont répondu à l’invitation, dont certains anciens étudiants ainsi que des étudiants actuels, des membres de la comProfessor Sébastien Jodoin Pilon, Sarah Chênevert-Beaudoin
munauté académique et administrative de McGill, des juristes du (BCL/LLB candidate), and Sarah Berger Richardson (DCL candisecteur public et privé, ainsi que des membres du judiciaire. Une date) should be congratulated and thanked for their exemplary
série de discussions a permis aux participants d’aborder difféwork on the public consultation.
rents thèmes issus du rapport Renewing the McGill Curriculum:
Pluralism in the World, dont 1) l’apprentissage expérientiel, 2) la
résolution de problèmes, 3) le travail de synthèse, et 4) l’éthique
Professor Hoi Kong, Associate Dean (Academic)
dans l’éducation juridique.
QN •
3 FEV 2015
•4
Law I
FARNELL
MORISSET
LES ATTENTES ET LE BIEN-ÊTRE :
QUELQUES RÉACTIONS À LA
RÉFORME DU CURRICULUM
Il y a six mois je ne savais pas ce qu’était un tort. Ça vaut la peine
Crédits sans évaluation
de garder ça en tête en lisant ce qui suit. Mais quand même, j’ai
lu avec grand intérêt Renewing the McGill Curriculum: Pluralism Un des changements proposés est le retrait du cours de Introin the World et à l’invitation des professeurs Jodoin et Kong, je
duction to Legal Research (mieux connu comme Legal Meth) et
partage mon avis.
l’introduction, à sa place, d’un cours de Problem Solving couplé
d’une session intensive d’une semaine au début de chaque sesD’abord, sur le fond, je suis largement d’accord et même excité
sion. En première session, cette semaine d’intégration vaudrait
par la direction proposée. Elle parle, sans ironie ni cynisme,
un crédit, mais n’aurait aucune évaluation associée. Essentield’une « dévotion à la poursuite de la sagesse » qui voit l’éducalement, c’est un crédit « garanti », dès la première semaine de
tion juridique comme une fin morale en soi. C’est une excellente cours d’un nouvel arrivé, moyennant la simple présence des étuvision. Sur le fond, l’ajout du droit autochtone à l’approche trans- diants. En principe, j’ai l’impression qu’un crédit assuré ne vaut
systémique, l’accent sur l’apprentissage expérientiel, et l’encadre- pas grand-chose – il ne démontre aucune compétence réelle et
ment des premières semaines de chaque session me semblent
ne démarque personne. Si ce n’est que pour ça, je suis incertain
tous être d’excellentes idées. J’espère donc que les quelques
devant le concept. En plus, l’offrir si tôt dans le cheminement
commentaires suivants ne seront pas perçus comme une critique, d’un nouvel étudiant risque d’augmenter l’attitude du « pay your
mais simplement comme les réflexions d’un 1L sur l’ensemble.
fees, get your Bs » - à éviter.
L’éducation en droit – un moyen ou une fin?
Introduction du High Pass / Pass / Fail
La faculté nous le dit haut et fort dès notre première journée
d’intégration : McGill ne forme pas des avocats, elle forme des
juristes. L’emphase est sur la théorie, l’analyse critique, les
fondements philosophiques, et l’impact des courants sociaux
des systèmes juridiques, et que très peu sur les questions de
pratique. Notre faculté de droit, comme elle aime bien le dire,
n’est pas une Law School qui forme des avocats comme une école
de métier forme des plombiers. Je ne suis certainement pas le
seul à y sentir une certaine odeur d’élitisme (mépris? c’est peutêtre trop loin), mais c’est l’ambition de la faculté. Je crois que
cette ambition est légitime. Il faut cependant se rappeler que
dans l’ambition, la réalité doit toujours figurer. Est-ce que cette
vision cadre avec les attentes et les ambitions des étudiants de
la faculté? Est-ce important? Sans nier que l’éducation juridique
est une fin en soi, nos attentes ne s’y limitent pas – qu’on se le
dise, la majorité d’entre nous sommes ici pour apprendre à devenir avocats, tandis que le mot « avocat » n’apparaît qu’une seule
fois dans le document de 15 pages.
Le programme proposé fait aussi l’introduction, à petite échelle
(seulement dans les cours remplaçant Legal Meth), d’un système
d’évaluation « High Pass / Pass / Fail ». Je comprends l’attrait
d’un système « Pass / Fail » strictement binaire, mais l’ajout
d’un « High Pass », pour moi, c’est changer quatre 30-sous pour
une piasse. Je ne vois simplement pas la différence entre un
système « High Pass / Pass / Fail » et un système où on limite
les professeurs à « A / B / F », sauf qu’on aura maintenant deux
types de notes différentes sur nos relevés (et une chose de plus à
expliquer aux employeurs qui les demandent). Je sais que cette
méthode est utilisée par d’autres programmes de droit, mais en
soi ce n’est pas une raison pour nous de le faire. Si l’intention est
d’en faire une véritable classe « Pass / Fail », je n’y vois pas de
problème, mais le plan proposé semble plutôt être un entre-deux
incertain.
Je n’ai aucun doute que les discussions sur ce sujet ont été
importantes lors de la dernière refonte du programme, et aussi
lors du développement des propositions actuelles. Je suis
aussi largement en faveur de la direction proposée – dans mon
expérience, la pratique s’apprend sur le tas de toute façon. Je
serais cependant curieux d’en savoir plus sur les démarches et le
raisonnement qui ont mené à cette direction.
Et le bien-être?
Avec respect pour le travail accompli, je constate aussi qu’il
manque quelque chose aux propositions : un regard sérieux vers
l’impact du programme sur le bien-être et la santé des étudiants.
Nous avons, cette année, mis de côté 50,000$ pour la santé
mentale continue des étudiants. Il me semble que la conjonction
actuelle est idéale pour se pencher sur l’impact du curriculum sur
le bien-être des étudiants. On affirme, dans le document, que
l’éducation en droit est un effort humaniste, dévoué à la poursuite de la sagesse, et qui a une valeur en soi. On doit prêcher
par l’exemple. Un souci pour notre bien-être collectif me semble
un objectif qui découle naturellement des valeurs humanistes.
QN •
3 FEB 2015
•5
Une réelle politique et vision de bien-être étudiant, intégrée
directement dans le curriculum de la faculté, serait un message
puissant que la faculté pourrait envoyer au monde juridique.
Cela serait aussi une confirmation de plus que la faculté de droit
de McGill est progressiste et inclusive.
Pourquoi ne pas intégrer directement dans le curriculum des
structures de support, similaires à celles qui existent déjà de
façon ad hoc dans la faculté (comme les Law Partners et le rôle
informel des Tutorial Leaders)? Le nouveau programme de Problem Solving, en petits groupes, me semble l’occasion idéale pour
y ajouter un système de support entre étudiants, professeurs, et
administration facultaire.
Law III
MIREILLE
FOURNIER
ON ARCHITECTURE
THOUGHTS ON CURRICULUM REFORM
The conversation on curriculum reform is an important conversation. As I read the proposal, however, my thoughts go to another
conversation: one that happens perhaps on a more informal
basis, between students and faculty members (mostly separately
I presume), and perhaps in seminars where it is called “the subject matter” of the discussion. I am speaking of the conversation
about teaching and learning practices at the faculty of law. Many
of my colleagues will say that these are two distinct conversations. I disagree.
sibility of personal interpretations. Of course, there were a few
rare classes that did not fit this model. There are always exceptions. But the proportion was overwhelming.
In my second year, my classes were very similar: focused on
doctrinal architecture, listing authorities, some of my colleagues
using summaries to prepare for exams—because they could,
because the type of information needed to do well on exams had
already been set down and codified by others. A lot of my classes
were built around textbooks, leaving theory to the introduction
and providing small excerpts of cases, drastically limiting the pos-
I think the capstone course is a great idea, but while the proposal
states that it requires students “to reason with materials that
cross boundaries,” (7) it strikes me that the “notable” examples of
this project are still “Policy-Formation, Lobbying, and Legislative
Drafting”—all state-centered modes of communication, prescribing for state-law materials to be invoked, and thus engendering
the same problem as fact-pattern-and-policy-examination. As for
Thus my comment on the curriculum reform is a comment on architecture. It is important to consider the names of classes, their
order, what they will cover over which period of time and how
many credits each will be allocated. But the story of my education
at McGill shows, I think, that some essential practices shape the
experience of students at the faculty, independently from grand
In my first year, I was taught in the “Transsystemic method”
architecture. Of course architecture influences the way people
(also commonly referred to as drinking the McGill Kool-Aid). This live, but perhaps, in this case, it distracts from something impormeans I had courses in civil and common law, and this was said to tant. Why put so much effort into finding the best way to design,
challenge my “prevailing assumptions about law.” Yet, I observe, into managing and organizing, if essential preconceptions we
my evaluations were all framed in the same way. In December,
have about what it means to learn the law remain unchallenged?
I wrote fact patterns and policy questions for all of my classes
except Methodology and Foundations.
The distinction between curriculum and teaching and learning
practices does not allow for the holistic discussion needed to
By April, it appears I knew “how to write a law exam.” My
achieve the vision the curriculum reform proposal sets forth.
studying methods were substantially influenced by the way I
Let us look at some practices suggested by the proposal. The
expected to be evaluated: focus on the legal doctrines, list off the problem-solving course, for example, focuses on “Adjudication,
authorities, the right kind of authorities—doctrinal and theoMediation, Negotiation, Policy-Formation, Litigating, Appelretical authors and non-law (historical and contextual) sources
late Advocacy, Lobbying, Counseling/Advising, Legislative and
mysteriously disappeared from my notes. To be honest, I was far Contractual Drafting.” (5) While providing diverse forms of
from experiencing pluralism then, far from looking for law beside evaluation, the course retains a legalistic undertone, and remains
and beyond the state, I was looking at what (I thought) mattered. essentially state-law-oriented. (The proposal itself goes from
I know my courses were taught in a theoretically sensitive way,
speaking of students in terms of “no matter what they choose
they were well articulated and well designed, and yet they led me to do after graduation” (3) to describing new courses needed for
to a specific kind of legal thinking. Not the one described in the
“today’s lawyer” (6)...) Where are we supposed to reconsider the
curriculum reform project.
division between theory and practice?
QN •
3 FEV 2015
•6
the insistence on “experiential learning,” the danger lies in treating clinics, clerkships and other positive-law oriented projects as
obvious “experiences” and others, like various types of political
and social engagement, and theoretical research, as “not (legally)
experiential enough.”
I do not have concerns with the coherence of the project presented. I entirely trust that its architecture is sound and, if possible, more elegant than the one we have right now. My concern
remains with how people teach and learn within the curriculum.
Perhaps it is best for these conversations to remain informal, but
informal does not mean unimportant. If legal pluralism is experienced (or not) both in the what and the how of our classes, our
conversations about the practices of our community ought to
come to bear.
FACULTY OF LAW presents /
FACULTÉ DE DROIT présente
Professor Joanne St. Lewis
ANNIE MACDONALD LANGSTAFF WORKSHOP SERIES
Faculty of Law / Faculté de Droit
CO-HOSTED BY THE BLACK LAW STUDENTS ASSOCIATION OF MCGILL (BLSAM)
University of Ottawa /
Université d’Ottawa
The public is cordially invited.
“Why does the Ferguson
Discussion in the States Matter
so Much to Black Canadians?”
6 février 2015
13h00 to 14h30 Pavillon Chancellor-Day
Salle Room 202, NCDH 3644, rue Peel
QN •
3 FEB 2015
•7
BLSAM
RADLAW
WOCC
THE BLACK LAW STUDENTS’ ASSOCIATION AT MCGILL (BLSAM),
COMMUNAUTÉ JURIDIQUE RADICALE ÉTUDIANTE DE MCGILL (RADLAW),
AND THE WOMEN OF COLOUR COLLECTIVE (WOCC)
JOINT STATEMENT ON THE RENEWAL AND REFORM
OF THE B.C.L./LL.B. CURRICULUM AT THE FACULTY
OF LAW
This statement is in response to the McGill Faculty of Law’s
Curricular Reform Proposal, and the process of acquiring student
feedback, including the Public Consultation on Tuesday, January
27, 2015 at Thomson House.
A. Process
a limited opportunity for students with ideas and concerns to
submit to the Quid Novi.
Students are one of the most important--if not the most important--stakeholders to any curriculum reform. If the Quid is really
the only forum available that is truly “public,” then students and
professor alike should have been given more notice about this
special edition of the Quid. For the curricular reform to be truly
inclusive, relevant, valuable and have staying power the next
15 years of McGill students and professors, then the Faculty’s
administration and committee need to dramatically change the
method of public consultations. A firm commitment to public
consultation requires an open, transparent and accessible process to ensure that the voices of all stakeholders are not only
included but are the guiding force behind the curricular reform.
Such a commitment is also essential for upholding accountability
to the voices of stakeholders.
In the Fall of 2012, the Law Students Association of McGill passed
“A Motion For a Substantial Student Role in Decisions About
Course Offerings and Course Content.” The main student group
behind this resolution was RADLAW, a club that has a history of
heavy involvement in advocating for curriculum reform. Strangely,
RADLAW, along with clubs such as the Student Association for Linguistic Rights/Association étudiante pour les droits linguistiques,
was not invited to the “public” consultation regarding the present
curricular reform. The “public” consultation was by invitation
only, with only one student from each group allowed to attend.
According to organizers, the public consultation was not recorded
or transcribed. Members of groups were told that the contents of
B. Law Education and Curriculum Objectives
the consultation would be summarized only, and students could
write a submission to the Quid if they wanted to share their ideas Relations of power fundamentally shape our society. Legal
in print form.
institutions play an essential role in both maintaining systems of
oppression as well as opportunities to confront them. Since this
In recent years, we note that there have been a few informal
reality informs the legal framework of our society, we feel that a
opportunities for input throughout process leading up to curricu- responsive and progressive legal education must directly express
lum reform. However, there has not been a widespread concerand reflect these realities throughout its curriculum. This must
ted effort to solicit students’ perspectives and proposals for
include literacy about how race, gender, class, sexuality, disabisubstantive, content-based reforms to the curriculum. Members lity and other sites of power manifest in legal institutions and
from our respective student groups attended many of these
legal relations. We believe all students must be given significant
informal processes in the past few years. The message commuopportunity to engage with these issues in order to gain necesnicated to the students was that the curricular reform would be
sary knowledge and skills. Many of the following comments and
more focused on pedagogical methods, such as introducing a flip- ideas reflect our belief that this understanding should be a focus
classroom, or problem-based learning, rather than substantive,
of the McGill Law curriculum.
content-based reform to the curriculum.
Transsystemic education is the claim to fame of McGill’s curriThe process was deeply disappointing. Meaningful public
culum; the successful implementation of a new transsystemic
consultation was limited to an invitation-only event that excluded curriculum should not be at the exclusion of the exploration and
certain student groups and did not provide open access to the
acknowledgement of systemic legal problems pertaining to race,
process undertaken to introduce and approve new changes.
gender, class, sexuality and disability. Law as truth and as the tool
In effect, the January 27th event amounted to using student
of justice when applied through a lens that ignores race, class and
representatives from select-groups to rubberstamp a process and gender, among other intersecting identities, is completely divorreform that had already been decided upon. We are also deeply ced from people’s material and lived reality and is converted into
disturbed that in the absence of full transparency and accouna tool of oppression and repression. McGill’s law faculty has a
tability at the 2-hour January 27th event, that there was such
responsibility to its students and to their future clients to ground
QN •
3 FEV 2015
•8
them in the realities of the ways communities experience law and
the legal system. This will only be achieved upon the introduction
of curricula that acknowledge the foundations of law in racist,
classist, sexist and colonialist ideology and how that still informs
the institutions of law; one that commits to a truly diverse law
faculty and student body, reflective of a cross-section of society,
and enabling real engagement in the issues affecting the most
marginalized in a non-tokenistic manner; and one that values
and elevates actions beyond the classroom, actions that aim at
transformation and social and economic justice.
C. General Problems of Pedagogy
In the past several years, memberships of our respective organizations have observed the preponderance of pedagogical
approaches that decontextualize and de-emphasize matters
where systemic issues of race, gender, class and sexuality are at
play. For instance, our first year Extra-Contractual Obligations/
Torts class discussed the Supreme Court case Augustus v Gosset
(1996 3 SCR 268) which deals with a mother’s suit against a police
officer who fatally shot her black son in Montreal. However, when
this matter was brought up in some of our classes, the role of
racial bias and the disproportionate force used against young
black people by police officers in North America were removed
from the discussion.
activity as an appropriate exercise. The film is demeaning to the
subjects it depicts. It was made prior to the decolonization of
Ghana and all other countries in sub-Saharan Africa. It reinforces
the most crude and debasing stereotypes of people of African
descent--that they are savage, barbarian, and sub-human.
We describe these instances that occur in our classes to provide
context for our concerns and reasons for our disappointment in
the lack of transparency in the outreach preceding the curriculum
reform. Our program cannot move towards greater inclusiveness
and attention to diversity without hearing from how students,
particularly students of colour, are impacted when issues of race
are brought up in the classroom without a recognition of the
presence of racism as one of the predominant structural forces
that impacts the membership of the judiciary and plays a role in
the outcome of cases.
C.1. Indigenous Law
We are pleased that the Faculty, in reforming the first-year
curriculum, has integrated Indigenous Property into the curriculum and that Indigenous Law is to be explored in the first-year
Integration Week. However, we have concerns about the method
and emphasis that will be given on this portion of the curriculum.
Given the lack of a full-time Indigenous Faculty member or a
Faculty member whose research concerns Indigenous property
in Quebec and the rest of Canada, the support for this curriculum
change does not seem to be there. It also remains unclear what
teaching methodology will engage this curriculum. Will this be a
tokenistic perspective that does not engage the historical context,
the subjugation of indigenous peoples under colonial regimes of
Britain and France, and the ongoing application of the Indian Act,
colonial legislation that maintains the power to define ‘Indians’
and ‘non-Indians’? Many students have observed that when any
legal issues that engage Indigenous perspectives, or concern
reserve/non-reserve relations, terms such as “we” or “us” are
used to refer to European settlers/non-indigenous peoples and
terms such “they” or “them” describe indigenous peoples. These
problematic binaries erase the presence of indigenous students
at the faculty as well as people of colour.
Other instances of decontextualized cases and materials from
their historical, social and political context should be rectified. In
Common Law Property, the US Supreme Court case Dred Scott v
Sandford is presented without reference to the fact that the Chief
Justice of the United States Supreme Court was a slaveholder and
that the decision is widely regarded as the worst decision in the
history of the United States Supreme Court. The case was also
taught without reference to the abundance of racial epithets and
racist depictions of African Americans in the judgment. While
attention was paid to the fact that the basis of the decision drew
from similar intellectual bases of the common law of property,
there was no attempt to contextualize the history of pre-Civil War
America (prior to the 14th Amendment). In our discussions with
leading legal scholars and students of colour at US law schools,
we note that this case is taught as a constitutional law case as
it should seem an obvious proposition that people of African
D. Social Justice Law
descent are not chattel that can be traded through a system of
legalized bondage.
We feel all law students should have substantial exposure to
social justice law and movement lawyering as this will make for
Earlier this month, in this year’s Foundations class, the 1955
better lawyers throughout the profession. However, at the very
film “Les Maîtres Fous,” a “docufiction” directed by Jean Rouch,
minimum, the Faculty should offer an adequate selection of courwas shown, a film that has been shown multiple times as part
sework and other opportunities for students wishing to pursue
of a 1L Foundations plenary session in previous years, despite
careers in this area.
the fact that students have expressed the problematic ways the
film depicts African people in past Foundations courses. The film We think there are some positive suggestions to this end in the
shows Ghanaian men frothing from the mouth, eating uncooked Curriculum Renewal proposal. We welcome the opportunity for
dogs, and performing other disturbing acts. After screening the
students to be able to participate in legal clinic education in their
film this year to the 1L plenary session, the Professor instructed second year as this provides students with some of the best posstudents to brainstorm suggestions on how to restore the rule
sible experience and exposure. We also welcome the suggestion
of law in a fictitious African country called “Congeria.” As in past for the development of an accompanying legal clinic course-years, a number of students rejected this film and subsequent
which preferably would be optional-- where critical issues related
QN •
3 FEB 2015
•9
to social justice law could be explored, such as access to justice,
innovative models of legal service delivery, and barriers and
challenges faced by marginalized clients. However, in order to
effectively implement this legal clinic component, the Faculty
needs to: a.) devote more resources for the legal clinic program,
and b.) find more legal clinic opportunities in Montreal.
intellectual points of inquiry and engagement. Our demand also
calls for a commitment to hire professors with core competencies
in these perspectives and with publications and ongoing research
that adds to the diversity of academic literature produced at the
Faculty and presented to students.
Additional Considerations. These examples should by no means
be seen to limit the ways the curriculum can be enhanced to
better respond to our concerns. There are many other ways that
we can imagine social justice could be infused into the curriculum
and the Renewal proposal. For example, the Problem Solving
Course and components of the reformed Legal Ethics seminar
can be used to explore social justice issues. Similarly, this should
1.) Poverty law. McGill’s offerings are considerably lacking in this be kept in mind as new courses are developed for the Interdisarea. The Law & Poverty course is a very welcome elective and
ciplinary Basket. Finally, we think the Capstone project would
enjoyed by students enrolled in the course but is limited due to
provide an excellent opportunity for interested students to use
its low-enrolment cap and theoretical focus. Students have to go their knowledge and skills in a project that is mutually beneficial
to other universities to take poverty law staples such as Housing to local social justice organizing in Montreal.
Law or Income Maintenance. As we have pointed out before,
Droit Social is a mandatory course for all students at UQAM and a Conclusion
course on Access to Justice is required of all first-year students at
the University of Windsor’s Faculty of Law. We think all students As McGill’s transsystemic program continues to evolve, a genuine
should be exposed to these topics, but at the very least students embrace of critical forms of understanding of the law, rather than
who need these courses for their careers should have poverty law a merely theoretical recognition of «non-state legal orders» is
options such as these offered on a regular basis.
necessary. What is a truly «critical» understanding of the law? It
is the recognition and realization that the maxims and self-legi2.) Business Associations. McGill made this course mandatory
timizing ideology in which the law is placed, is a farce. The mere
for students commencing their degrees in 2012-2013 in order
concept of the law - a mechanism that works in the same way
to comply with new required competencies of the Federation of for each citizen - must be deconstructed. Rather than merely
Law Societies of Canada. At the time, we raised concerns that
parroting tired liberal justifications of property, a critical property
this was another mandatory course (taking away limited elective law course would seek to showcase the widespread inequacredits) introduced with a decidedly corporate focus. In a townlity that this institution supports. Contract law, as essentially a
hall meeting discussing the change, Dean Jutras expressed that
by-product of capitalism, ought to be examined as a means of
a future option would be for the Business Associations course to domination. Foundations of Canadian Law should lead students
widen in scope to cover a broader set of associations, including
to question why jurisprudence is so historically male, and what
non-governmental associations and non-profits. This would
kinds of damage this has caused. Students should question claims
make the course relevant to students interested in pursuing social that formal inclusion of women in the legal process has somehow
justice law and movement lawyering. We think that renaming
corrected an entire history of male domination. In short, critical
the course and its description in such a way, and hiring profesunderstanding involves an institutional commitment to celebrasors/practitioners who could teach on and have experience with ting all perspectives on the law, even inconvenient ones.
various forms of association, would allow it to be more relevant
to a broader set of interests.
A curriculum change that exposes students to marginalized
perspectives on the law requires efforts beyond the scope of the
3.) Foundations of Canadian Law. The Faculty’s first-year course current curriculum changes. It requires an institutional com“Foundations of Canadian Law” has considerable potential to
mitment to teaching law even in ways that are inconvenient or
explore issues of power and social justice. Without wanting to
troubling to hear.
create a cookie-cutter course, we think it is important that legal
theories and frameworks such as Critical Legal Theory, Critical
We realize that the curriculum reform process in and of itself is
Race Theory, Feminist Legal Theory (and their offshoots: Critical not a panacea to our concerns. The Faculty must be committed
Race Feminism, QueerCrit, LatCrit and so on) are introduced to
to include historically marginalized voices and identities, via
students early in their legal studies and are present throughout
professors who are equipped to teach the courses and topics
their legal studies. Foundations provides a key opportunity to ex- we have been advocating. Professors and course lecturers have
pose students to these theoretical perspectives as countervailing the onus of proposing courses that reflect these issues and then
influences in response to dominant theoretical perspectives in
ensuring their course materials allow for critical engagement with
legal academia, yet not all sections even cover them. Professors questions of power and social justice. And finally, we as students
teaching these courses should integrate these frameworks into
have a responsibility to engage in our courses and commitments
their syllabi as they imbibe their courses with their own preferred in the Faculty in ways that allow our peers and ourselves to
There are additional measures the Faculty can take to make the
curriculum more responsive to social justice and movement
lawyering. We will highlight a few that we have advanced over
the past few years, which we do not see addressed by the curricular reform.
QN •
3 FEV 2015
• 10
become jurists equipped to be effective in the world we live in.
content of their courses, especially required courses;
We intend this statement to be a comprehensive overview of
the many concerns of students in our respective organizations.
We have a mandate to bring these issues forward as a means to
advance engagement with our education and to improve the overall quality and inclusiveness of our legal education. We hope this
discussion ignites critical reflection, conversation, and ultimately
action among students, administrators, faculty, and the broader
McGill community.
WHEREAS other Quebec universities allow for student input into
the content of each course;
Please feel free to reach out to our respective groups:
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Signed,
The Women of Colour Collective (WOCC)
McGill Radical Law Student Community (RADLAW)
The Black Law Students Association at McGill (BLSAM)
A MOTION FOR A SUBSTANTIAL STUDENT ROLE IN DECISIONS
ABOUT COURSE OFFERINGS AND COURSE CONTENT
WHEREAS some law faculties in Canada have mandatory courses
in Access to Justice (Windsor), Social Rights (UQAM) and Aboriginal Law (UBC) that are either not even offered at McGill or not on
a regular basis;
WHEREAS students were inadequately consulted during the curriculum changes that took place last year;
WHEREAS measures to address gaps in the course offerings, such
as student-led seminars, are welcome but their constraints are
too limiting;
WHEREAS students have no representation in decisions about
annual course offerings and each course’s content;
BE IT RESOLVED that the Faculty Council Curriculum Committee
student representatives canvas student ideas through town halls
and/or written submissions to determine the best ways students
can play a substantial role in decisions about course offerings and
course material;
17 October 2012
BE IT RESOLVED that following this consultation, the Faculty
Council Curriculum Committee student representatives organize
WHEREAS the curriculum forms a fundamental part of a student’s a special General Assembly by the end of January 2013 to vote
legal education;
on the preferred method(s) of student input into course offerings
and course content;
WHEREAS students are the people most affected by decisions
about course offerings and course content;
BE IT RESOLVED that the LSA advocate that students play a
substantial role in decisions about course offerings and course
WHEREAS students are in a good position to know what types of content based on the results of this special GA;
courses will be necessary or useful for their future careers and
personal development;
BE IT RESOLVED that the LSA advocate that students be allowed
to take more than one student-led seminar for credit;
WHEREAS the Faculty is currently undergoing a review of the
curriculum;
BE IT RESOLVED that the LSA advocate that the Faculty commit to
offering any student-led seminar as a regular course after it has
WHEREAS many students are disappointed with the Faculty
been held three times.
course offerings, including topic and language of instruction;
WHEREAS many students are sometimes disappointed with the
Contributor’s
note
Incorporation of Indigenous and Aboriginal Law
Check out next week’s edition for reflections on this!
QN •
3 FEB 2015
• 11
Law II
PETER
GRBAC
CURRICULUM RENEWAL: A RESPONSE
Introduction
I applaud the spirit underlying the Curriculum Renewal Proposal
(“Proposal”) and welcome a number of the envisioned changes.
In particular, I praise the explicit pedagogical focus on problembased learning and the greater institutional recognition of Indigenous legal orders within our Faculty. While I believe that this Proposal represents a good start in the curriculum renewal process, I
am of the opinion that methodological, pedagogical, and practical
challenges remain to be addressed. I have organized my response
to the Proposal under three broad headings – “Re-imagining how
we teach”, “Re-imagining how we learn”, and “Re-imagining the
spaces in which we teach and learn”. Under each heading, I articulate a response to some element(s) of the Proposal while offering concrete alternatives and suggesting questions to consider.
My response is based entirely upon the distributed Proposal and
my own knowledge of the institutional structures and political
environment of our Faculty.
Section 1: Re-imagining how we teach
nothing new or useful to the student’s transcript and law school
experience.
Section 2: Re-imagining how we learn
Affirming the continued importance and relevance of the local
While the Proposal notes that the comparative thrust “should not
lead one to think that our program ignores the particular or the
local” (3) I remain unconvinced. In many respects, I believe the
Working Group has placed far too much emphasis on comparison as a methodology. Comparison is but one way to approach
the law. At a certain point, comparing one legal tradition with
another breaks down as the intellectual pursuit (largely the utility
of this pursuit) reaches a limit. Do the Immersion courses offer
sufficient intellectual time and space for the student to study just
one legal tradition on its own – to grapple with its unique theoretical and practical contours? Moreover, what space do we afford
within the curriculum for a critical discussion of comparison as a
methodology?
Avoiding redundancy and respecting student choice
Relatedly, I do not support the introduction of the Legal Traditions basket and the elimination of the separate Common and
A key challenge raised by curriculum design is properly balanCivil Law baskets. This new basket prioritizes breadth over depth
cing the pedagogical interests of the Faculty and the right of
by preventing the student from exploring fully the legal tradition
students to pursue an academic programme that suits their
of his or her own choosing. Consider the case of a student who
own needs and interests. The ideal curriculum, in my opinion,
prefers the Common Law (over the Civil Law) and intends to
is one of ‘structured flexibility’ that equips the student with
begin his/her legal career in Toronto. The curriculum ought to
the necessary foundational tools without being burdensome,
facilitate this preference and choice by allowing the student to
over-restrictive, and redundant. I take issue with two proposed
tailor his/her course selection. This is not to say that the student
courses and articulate my critique in the form of questions. First, should be allowed to abandon the Civil Law. If anything, the curI would recommend eliminating the required second-year course rent structure of transsystemic courses ensures that the student
“Transsystemic Law in Global Context”. According to the Propoalways make reference to the civilian tradition. As much as
sal, this new course is designed to “go beyond both (public and
Transystemia is an intellectual project, it must also be a practical
private international law) to include pluralist sources of law that one. We must recognize that the primary purpose of our Faculty
transcend state borders” (6). If the Faculty still intends on offering is to train lawyers and that membership in a legal community (the
public and private international law, what new skill-sets, metho- various bars) remains defined by specific legal traditions. Instead
dological practices, or areas of knowledge will be developed by
of eliminating the separate baskets, we should be creating new
this new course? Can these issues not be raised and addressed
courses that fit within each basket. The proposed tradition-speciwithin the respective international law courses? Put simply, what fic advanced property classes, therefore, are terrific additions to
does “go beyond” mean in concrete terms? Second, I would
the curriculum.
recommend eliminating the required third-year Capstone Course.
I believe that the supposed skills to be gained by this course are
Innovating legal education
sufficiently addressed in other courses, notably those of first year.
What distinguishes the Capstone Course from any other course
By far, the most disappointing aspect of the Proposal is the
that uses a similar pedagogical structure? In my opinion, these
section titled “Innovations in Experiential Learning”. Far from
two required courses, cloaked in pedagogical buzzwords, add
being innovative, the proposed changes do little to push learning
QN •
3 FEB 2015
• 13
beyond the classroom walls of our Faculty. In response, I offer
three alternative programming opportunities that operate on
three distinct institutional levels. To be clear, the last two do not
qualify as experiential learning per se, but I believe that they
would provide fertile grounds to develop experiential learning
opportunities.
Within our Faculty, I propose the creation of a Legal Innovation
Fund to be managed by a Legal Innovation Centre. This pool of
money would be used to promote original student research,
assist students and professors in launching cross-border legal
projects (notably virtual ones), and foster greater collaboration
between the Faculty’s various centres. Some examples of projects
include funding a student to pursue comparative constitutional
research in India and sponsoring the development of an app that
furthers access to justice in different parts of the world. Each
year, the Dean would host a challenge by selecting a pressing
legal issue (global or local) and invite members of the McGill
legal community to brainstorm a solution. This solution would be
operationalized with the support of the Centre.
Within our University, I propose greater collaboration between
the Faculties by encouraging more dual degree programs and
introducing certificate programs. The inspiration behind this
proposal stems from the University of Toronto Faculty of Law’s
recent expansion of their cross faculty programming. There, you
can combine your law degree with Economics, English, Information Studies, Global Affairs, and Public Policy (to name but a few
examples). Students are also able to pursue certificate programs
within Aboriginal Studies, Environmental Studies, Jewish Studies,
and Sexual Diversity and Gender Studies. Currently, our Faculty
only offers two joint programs – the MBA with integrated B.C.L./
LL.B. (which is limited to a small number of students) and the
MSW with integrated B.C.L./LL.B. (which, according to students
who have attempted the joint degree, is covered in far too much
red-tape). If we truly care about “exploit[ing] our interdisciplinary
capacity and enabl[ing] students to work across doctrinal silos”
(3), we must recognize first, that the Law Faculty operates within
an intellectually rich and diverse university community that has
much to offer our own Faculty, second, that our Faculty does not
have the institutional capacity to offer the same breadth and
depth of course materials available across McGill, and third, that
true interdisciplinarity must push beyond the safe and structured
confines of our own Faculty.
Beyond our University, I propose stronger and more coordinated
exchange opportunities. For all the discourse within the Proposal
about legal education on a global scale, I was surprised to find
little if any mention of opportunities to experience law abroad.
There are limits to learning about legal traditions from a textbook; cosmopolitanism emerges through conversation and interactions with those who study and practice law beyond our own
borders. We need to incentivize study abroad opportunities while
forging stronger and more coordinated exchange programmes
that are centered less on location and more on intellectual
connections and academic themes.
QN •
3 FEV 2015
• 14
Section 3: Re-imaging the spaces in which we teach and learn
From the very beginning of the Proposal, there emerges the risk
of forgetting that the twin processes of teaching and learning
take place within the physical confines of our Faculty. Re-read
the Faculty Council resolutions on the first page and note the
language used – “Education on a global scale”, “the crossing of
… boundaries”, and “cosmopolitan jurists”. Pursuing a globally
focused curriculum reconfigured for problem-based learning is
all well and good but do we have the financial resources and the
physical spaces to make this curriculum a success?
Effectively and fully promoting this new type of learning and
teaching will require extensive renovations to the spaces of our
Faculty. The rigid hierarchical set-ups of our lecture halls will
have to give way to flexible classrooms. Moreover, investments
will have to be made in technology (not just more electric plugs
for our various devices but also enhanced video conferencing
to enable cross-border collaboration). We must also appreciate
that this new type of learning and teaching extends beyond the
confines of the classroom. Informal discussions and debates of
the law can be just as powerful as the formal ones. Think of the
exchange student sharing her experience working for an international tribunal with a student from McGill Law. We need to build
accessible, comfortable, diverse, and safe spaces that encourage
interactions like this one to take place.
Conclusion
The curriculum renewal process invites us all – administrators,
professors, and students – to grapple with how we think of the
relationship between student and professor, the place of the
Faculty both within the university and our wider society, and
the very nature of legal instruction. The thought of transforming
these various relationships is indeed exciting but I wonder how
our conversation (and the results) surrounding curriculum renewal change if we think of this process as less of a renewal and
more of a re-imagination? How would you re-imagine learning
and teaching? I appreciate that financial constraints, bureaucratic
hurdles (characterized by a “No can do” mentality), and personal
agendas are inevitable forces to grapple with throughout this
process but they need not define it. That is why I welcome the
various voices filling this edition of the Quid and look forward
to seeing how they will shape the Proposal and the institutional
identity of our Faculty.
BLG VOUS SOUHAITE
BON SUCCÈS POUR LA
COURSE AUX STAGES!
Nous vous invitons à nous transmettre votre CV
dès maintenant. Au plaisir de faire votre connaissance.
NOUS NE SOMMES PAS SEULEMENT
À LA RECHERCHE D’AVOCATS
EXCEPTIONNELS, MAIS SURTOUT
D’ÊTRES D’EXCEPTION.
Pour consulter les fiches biographiques de nos
avocats et voir si BLG répond à vos aspirations,
visitez le site blg.com/students/fr
Calgary | Montréal | Ottawa
Toronto | Vancouver
Avocats | Agents de brevets et de marques de commerce
Borden Ladner Gervais S.E.N.C.R.L., S.R.L.
est une société à responsabilité limitée de l’Ontario.
blg.com
SAO Corner
SAO OFFICE HOURS FOR 2015 Mondays & Wednesdays: 10am to 2pm Tuesdays/
Thursdays: 9am to 12:30pm & 2-­‐4pm Fridays: 10am-­‐12pm HOW SUBMIT ASSIGNMENTS TO THE SAO Use your McGill email only DECEMBER EXAM VIEWING AT THE SAO Les étudiants et étudiantes peuvent se présenter au Secrétariat des études en droit, pour consulter leurs exams d’automne 2014 jusqu’au 1.
2.
Send to [email protected] CC Professor (unless otherwise specified) 3 février, 2015 de 9h00-­‐12h30 et 14h00-­‐16h00. 3.
4.
Email suject line: Course Name – Assignment Name Email Body: Student Name – McGill ID# OFFICIAL GRADE REVIEW REQUEST DEADLINE Tuesday February 3, 2015 5.
Save assignment as follows: Course Name – Assignment Name – Iden^fier (Iden^fier: as specified by the professor ) McGill/Shantou Summer Law Program (3 credits) This year, the program is offered in Montreal, May 18-­‐29, 2015. The focus for the 2015 edi^on is on two broad themes, the rule of law, and disability and human rights. ROBSON HALL'S ISRAEL AND INTERNATIONAL LAW PROGRAM AT HEBREW UNIVERSITY For more informa^on about the program, please see the course website: hbp://law.robsonhall.ca/
hebrew-­‐university-­‐
summer-­‐program hbp://www.mcgill.ca/law-­‐
studies/undergrad-­‐
programs/summer/
mcgillshantou-­‐summer-­‐
law-­‐program McGill Law students who complete the program will receive 4 outside Law elec^ve credits. Deadline: Monday, February 9, 2015, 15:00 Deadline: February 5, 2015 February 2015 SAO Events Introduc<on to Mindfulness Based Stress Management Workshop (offered by McGill Counselling Services) Ask an Advisor! Clinical Legal Educa<on Open House Drop-­‐in, Ques<on & Answer Session Wednesday, February 18, 1:00-­‐2:30pm, Monday, February 23, Atrium 1:00-­‐2:30pm, Atrium Wednesday, February *Pizza will be served* *lunch will be served* 25, 1:00-­‐2:30pm, NDCH 200 WELLNESS • Law Peer to Peer Support Program / Programme de souGen des pairs en droit -­‐ Drop In hours! Mercredi de 13h00 à 14h30, NCDH 203 Jeudi de 11h30 à 13h00, NCDH 203 Excep&ons: Jeudi de 11h30 à 12h30 dans la salle NCDH 203 seulement du 29 janvier au 19 février. • COUNSELLING WORKSHOPS AND GROUPS Workshops unGl February 6th, 2015 hTp://www.mcgill.ca/
counselling/ CONTESTS/SUBMISSIONS/AWARDS hTp://www.mcgill.ca/law-­‐studies/informaGon/
funding/external •  U21 UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH CONFERENCE 2015 IN NEW ZEALAND – JULY 6-­‐10, 2015 Deadline: Wednesday, February 11 at 3pm • CHAMBRE DE COMMERCE ET D’INDUSTRIE CANADA-­‐LIBAN Date limite: vendredi 20 février 2015 • The Dalai Lama Fellow (DLF) Program L'AssociaGon du Barreau canadien (ABC): Concours de dissertaGon 201520 • Date limite: février, 2015; 8 bourses d’études de 3 000 $ CAN Law II
RÉFLEXIONS SUR LA
RÉFORME DU CURRICULUM
SUZANNE
ZACCOUR
J’ai décidé de coucher sur papier quelques idées et préoccupations qui me sont venues en tête, spontanément, à la lecture
de la proposition de réforme du programme de B.C.L./LL.B. Il ne
s’agit pas d’un document travaillé ou d’un brillant exercice de
style, mais je le partage tout de même ici pour laisser des traces
des questionnements et des remarques que je n’ai pas eu l’occasion d’exprimer lors de la consultation publique de la semaine
passée. Ça sera, par la même occasion, votre chance d’enfin me
lire dans le Quid dans un contexte qui n’est pas, disons, «confrontational».
Première année
programme taillé sur mesure (par exemple, encore une fois, en
choisissant plutôt des cours de droit criminel, ou alors en prenant
des cours de droit public). Les cours de 2e année ont beaucoup en
commun (plutôt de droit privé, ancrés dans les traditions et/ou
le droit positif, etc.), et certainEs étudiantEs risquent de voir leur
intérêt chuter étant donnée la flexibilité réduite du parcours.
Cet enjeu est particulièrement important du fait de la course aux
stages en 2e année : idéalement, il faut que les étudiantEs aient
eu l’occasion de cerner les domaines de droit qui les intéressent
dès leur 3e session. Comment le faire s’ielles n’ont pas la chance
de prendre un cours de droit de la famille, de droit autochtone ou
de taxes, par exemple?
La propriété transsystémique, c’est une surprise plus que bienvenue. Après avoir entendu pendant toute une année que les droits Mon changement préféré à la deuxième année est la possibilité
des biens étaient irréconciliables, voilà que la plupart de nos
de réaliser des crédits hors cours de type « Legal Clinic » dès la
cours de Common Law Property réfèrent au droit civil.
deuxième année. C’est encore une fois un peu artificiel étant
donné le nombre de crédits laissés au choix de l’étudiantE, mais
Ce qui me plait moins, c’est qu’on enlève la possibilité de prendre je me répète. Il faudrait cependant que la limite de 15 crédits
le cours de droit criminel en première année. Pour quelqu’une
hors cours soit modifiée, ce qui n’est pas, à mon souvenir, indiqué
qui veut pratiquer dans ce domaine, c’est problématique, étant
dans la proposition. 15 crédits, ce n’est vraiment pas tant que ça.
donné que les cours de droit criminel ont tous beaucoup de
Je me fie à mon expérience personnelle : ayant fait un stage interprérequis, et ne se donnent qu’une fois par année. Développer
national en première année et ayant l’intention de faire un moot,
un bon bagage en droit criminel devient plus difficile sans Droit
une clerckship et un cours de legal clinic, je dois faire une croix
pénal en 2e session (et les changements en 2e année) : on sait
sur le McGill Law Journal ou l’expérience de TL ou de TA. Cepenpourtant que les stages au DPCP sont très contingentés, et que
dant, si cette limite est imposée pour donner l’opportunité à plus
certaines opportunités comme Innocence McGill demandent
d’étudiantEs de profiter de ces expériences, elle me parait alors
d’avoir pris des cours de droit criminel.
plus appropriée que s’il s’agit de nous forcer à prendre un certain
nombre de cours. On peut toutefois deviner que le nombre
Je suis assez favorable au fait d’ajouter des cours d’intégration et d’opportunités de cours de clinique juridique sera augmenté dans
de « résolution de problème ». Cependant, ces cours « spéciaux » les prochaines années.
demandent sans doute beaucoup de travail, et raccourcissent la
session régulière et le temps imparti pour les autres cours. Étant
Troisième ou quatrième année
donné la volonté d’impliquer les étudiantEs dans plus d’apprentissage « clinique », espérons qu’une attention sera portée à
Je vois ici un problème majeur : le fait que le cours d’intégration
l’objectif de ne pas augmenter davantage la charge de travail déjà doive être pris en dernière session rend impossible le fait de
lourde des McGilloisEs.
terminer en échange (ou en été?). Il devrait pouvoir se prendre
à l’automne ou à l’hiver, au choix. Pour qu’il soit significatif, il deDeuxième année
vrait, à mon sens, valoir plus de deux crédits. Je propose comme
point de départ un projet que l’étudiantE devrait créer en groupe
Je suis sceptique par rapport à l’obligation de prendre Droit des
ou en solo, par exemple une clinique d’information juridique
affaires et Droit judiciaire en première année. Bien que JICP soit itinérante dans le métro, un blogue juridique de style Éducaloi,
un prérequis utile pour plusieurs cours et éventuellement pour
un travail de recherche de « terrain », etc. Ça permettrait aux
d’autres expériences juridiques, Droit des affaires est plus spéétudiantEs de cibler le type d’expérience dont ielles jugent qu’il
cifique. Ce changement porte à 20 crédits le nombre de crédits
est manquant à leur formation, et d’exercer leur créativité – sous
obligatoires en deuxième année. Entre les contraintes d’horaire
la supervision d’unE professeurE. En dernière session, c’est le
et la limite au nombre de cours qu’on peut prendre, on réduit
moment de laisser aux presque finissantEs un peu de liberté.
significativement la liberté des étudiantEs de se construire un
QN •
3 FEV 2015
• 18
Paniers et exigences
problèmes de santé mentale. Étant donné que la faculté sélectionne des étudiantEs qui ont donné la preuve qu’ielles étaient
J’aurais aimé plus d’informations pour comprendre pourquoi les travaillantEs, je ne vois pas de raison d’écarter la proposition de
cours de droit du travail et de droit de l’immigration ne feront
passer à cours sans notes. Ça, ça serait radicalement différent de
plus partie du « panier » de cours en droits humains. Je note au
ce que font les autres universités! De toute façon, les notes sont
passage que les cours qui remplissent plusieurs exigences, par
au final assez uniformes, ce qui génère d’ailleurs beaucoup de
exemple Law and Poverty, sont un outil important pour les étufrustration chez les étudiantEs. Pendant que j’y suis, et au risque
diantEs qui terminent en 3 ans.
de sembler paresseuse (en droit, l’équilibre est confondu avec la
paresse), la charge de travail en termes de quantité de lectures
L’idée de rendre obligatoire un cours de droit international me
(lectures qui, soyons franches, sont rarement lues dans leur
parait étrange : les cours obligatoires sont là pour s’assurer que
totalité) doit être repensée. La faculté devrait au moins fournir
les étudiantEs aient l’occasion de prendre et prennent effective- aux professeurEs (qui, peut-être, ont oublié ce que c’est qu’une
ment des cours qui leur seront essentiels. Or, le cours de droit
session à 18 crédits?) une quantité de lecture suggérée et une
international public est donné à chaque session, est un prérequis quantité de lectures maximale. Moins de lectures, ce n’est pas
à plusieurs cours et contient un assez grand nombre d’étudiantEs. moins de travail : c’est un travail plus approfondi, moins de stress,
Il semble clair que celles et ceux qui jugent qu’une carrière
et plus d’égalité (pensons notamment aux étudiantEs parents ou
internationale est possible peuvent facilement suivre et suivent
qui travaillent à temps partiel).
ce cours. Tant qu’à augmenter (de 3 crédits au total) le nombre
de cours obligatoire – ce qui n’est pas anodin, surtout pour les
Un mot sur la pratique du litige qui est très peu enseignée à la
programmes en trois ans –, je pense qu’on pourrait en faire un
faculté. J’ai eu l’occasion de suivre le cours de Civil Litigation
meilleur usage (suspense! J’en parle plus loin).
Workshop, l’occasion d’un apprentissage considérable. Ce cours
et Trial Advocacy sont cependant « contingentés » et, surtout,
Ayant suivi le cours de Critical Engagement with Human Rights,
toujours donnés le soir, un horaire qui ne convient pas à toutes
je trouve intéressant de l’obliger aux étudiantEs qui ont fait un
les situations. Je crois que la faculté devrait offrir Civil Litigation
stage, quel qu’il soit. Ce cours est enrichissant et se démarque
Workshop, ou un cours de litige, de façon intensive l’été. Comme
des autres. Je me permets de supposer qu’il ne devra cependant il y a la possibilité de se lancer dans l’apprentissage de la médiaêtre pris qu’une fois… Aussi, notons qu’on monte désormais à 23 tion ou de l’arbitrage par le biais de programmes d’été, le litige ne
crédits obligatoires en deuxième année (pour celles et ceux qui
doit pas être mis de côté. En plus de l’importance du litige pour
font le stage en première année, comme c’était mon cas).
un bon nombre d’avocatEs, le développement de la confiance
en soi et de l’assurance (surtout chez les femmes) passe par une
Les oubliéEs : ce que j’aurais aimé voir dans cette réforme
pratique du litige qui ne commence pas le jour où la vie d’une
cliente est en jeu!
À mon sens, il faudrait absolument ajouter une exigence de
suivre un cours critique de 3 crédits, parmi un panier qui contien- Pour finir, je crois que la réforme du curriculum est l’occasion de
drait des cours tels Feminist Legal Theory, Critical Legal Theory,
repenser non seulement ce qu’on enseigne, mais aussi comment.
Queer Legal Theory… Ce sont des cours qui sont rarement donnés Je suis sûre que vous me voyez venir : je voudrais voir une prise
(ou en même temps que des cours obligatoires de deuxième
de position claire et forte en faveur d’un enseignement non
année…), et donc que les étudiantEs n’ont pas l’occasion de
sexiste. En plus de celles dont j’ai déjà abondamment parler la
prendre même lorsqu’ielles le souhaitent. Lors de la consultasession passée, dans le cadre du projet pour un enseignement
tion publique sur la réforme, il a été question d’implication et de non sexiste, plusieurs mesures peuvent être prises pour favoriser
justice sociales. Il faut questionner la vision du droit comme soit l’égalité des chances entre les étudiantEs. Que les cours obliganeutre et extérieure à toute préoccupation sociale, soit solution toires ne soient donnés qu’entre 10h et 16h, par exemple, facilite
à un problème social (clinique juridique, pro-bono…). Parfois le
la conciliation parentalité-études. Un exercice profond de remise
droit est précisément le problème, et les juristes forméEs par
en question de la reproduction des oppressions au sein de la
McGill doivent IMPÉRATIVEMENT prendre conscience de leurs
faculté (malgré les mesures déjà prises en faveur de l’égalité) doit
privilèges.
être réalisé dans les plus brefs délais.
C’est peut-être un sujet qui sera abordé plus tard dans le processus de réforme, mais la discussion sur la façon de noter les cours
est absente de la proposition. Périodiquement, des étudiantEs de
Radlaw principalement ramènent sur la table l’idée de n’avoir que
des cours de type pass/fail. McGill prends le soin de sélectionner des candidatEs très impliquéEs dans leur milieu… et aussitôt
admisEs, celleux-ci mettent fin à ces implications, étant donnée
une charge de travail écrasante. McGill nous « désimplique »,
ce que cette réforme prétend éviter. On sait également que les
études en droit sont corrélées avec de nombreux et fréquents
QN •
3 FEB 2015
• 19
Law II
JACOB
SCHWEDA
EXPERIENTIAL (NOT EXPLOITATIVE)
EDUCATION
Like many in our community, I am excited by some aspects of
the proposed curriculum reform released last week. A desire for
increased experiential education, however, gives me pause. I am
concerned that “experiential” learning will in fact continue to
be a euphemism for the exploitation of our students for free or
cheap labour.
are eliminated and the motivation to fight for funding is diminished when a community group can rely on hundreds of free
hours of student work every semester.
Organizations pay students when they can and when grant
money allows. The problem is that minimum wage laws are not
optional. They represent a societal consensus about the miniThe proposal itself acknowledges that “[a]s things stand, a large mum amount that must be paid for each hour of someone’s time.
number of students engage in activities such as clinical placeThey are public order provisions and cannot be contracted out of.
ments, internships and judicial clerkships” and hopes that “these Even when there are narrow exceptions for students, we should
opportunities can be expanded in the future.” Although students not forget the spirit behind these basic workplace protections.
do gain invaluable experience through existing opportunities, it is Our time has real value.
not clear that they should continue in their current form.
Increased use of free student labour may even open up the
A good example is the Faculty’s own use of Tutorial Leaders
Faculty and other organizations to potential liability. Take our
(TLs) and Group Assistants (GAs). Under the guise of providing
own Legal Information Clinic, for example, which pays its direcstudents with teaching and research experiences, these positions tors during the summer and asks them to pay tuition to work for
actually require participants to pay tuition to perform work that credit during the school year. It’s not clear to me why (ironically,
is paid employment in other faculties at McGill. The result is
for a legal information clinic) we believe a service that is clearly
that students teach tutorials, assist with lesson plans, and help
an employment relationship during the summer can magically
grade papers for the benefit of professors. Asking the youngest
become one exempt from minimum wage laws in the fall.
members of our community (students), who face an unsure job
market and high levels of debt, to pay tuition in order to work for The Commission des normes du travail’s Interpretation Guide
the wealthiest and most established members of our community echoes many of these concerns. It acknowledges that it “is
(professors) is unjust.
sometimes hard to determine what constitutes voluntary work…
However, alleging that the smooth operation of the enterprise
Our students also provide legal information and other services
does not require the hiring of new employees… or that the worfor free to community organizations. Our students provide legal kers agreed to work for free does not justify non-compliance with
information about pensions, housing, and welfare benefits at
labour standards… [O]ne cannot claim that the worker agreed to
Project Genesis. We provide research support on all fields of law work on a voluntary basis.”1 To determine if someone is entitled
at the Mile End Legal Clinic. Other examples abound. Although
to the minimum wage, the Commission will ask: whether the
this work directly benefits those in need in our communities, it
person is performing any work whatsoever, whether there is a
also benefits McGill financially when it is done for credit. Tuition relationship of subordination between the employer and the
fees and government subsidies are, paradoxically, paid to McGill employee, etc.
to rubber stamp work done outside of the university. None of
that money flows to the lawyers and other staff who supervise
We are a community of bright jurists. However, even if we are
and train our students in those community organizations.
able to come up with a clever way to evade minimum wage
laws, it will not render the practices I have highlighted ethical or
Students are also occasionally asked to work for free (or to
appropriate.
pay tuition to work) for the Quebec government (through,
for example, clerkships) or for private lawyers. This is another
There are a number of responses to the concerns I have presexample of asking relatively vulnerable members of the legal
ented. Some would emphasize the value of the experience that
community to provide free labour to some of the wealthiest and students gain. While this may be true, experience is does not
most established (particularly when providing support to judges). replace a fair wage. Many jobs in society are meaningful and provide experiences for learning. I imagine, for example, that being
This constant supply of free student labour indirectly devalues
a law professor is stimulating and educational, yet we do not ask
the work done in community legal organizations. Entry-level jobs our professors to work for free (and with good reason: prestige
QN •
3 FEB 2015
• 21
and experience do not pay your rent or buy you groceries).
I will close with two positive notes. First, I acknowledge that
many initiatives that exist for students were established in good
Others might say that the Faculty or supervising lawyers or judges faith by a faculty keen to offer flexible and meaningful learning
provide training and mentorship to students. Again, this may
experiences. I am hopeful that our changing economic context
be true. But that is also the case in paid employment (and, in
and the desire to expand the law school student body beyond the
fact, training periods must be paid under Quebec’s Act Respecwealthy (who can afford to work for free) will also convince those
ting Labour Standards). In addition, students provide real value
same faculty members that new safeguards are required.
while learning and being trained: they research legal questions,
interview clients, and draft bench memos. These tasks can only
Second, there is real potential to include meaningful experiential
be carried out after years of (expensive) post-secondary educalearning within classrooms themselves. The proposed curriculum
tion and after acquiring a variety of skills that are without a doubt reform calls for this. Problem-based learning and other strategies
worth at least $10.35 per hour.
allow students to link concrete problems to academic theory.
A good example is the approach used by Professor Campbell
With this in mind, any addition of clinical “internships” or “place- and Dean Jutras, who integrate complex litigation, contract, and
ments” must be carried out ethically and in conformity with the mediation problems into their Advanced Civil Law Obligations
spirit and the letter of Quebec’s employment laws. McGill cannot class. Approaches such as the aforementioned can be delivered
continue to ask students to pay hundreds (sometimes thousands) by McGill employees (professors), and it then becomes legitiof dollars in exchange for printing a credit count on a transcript
mate to ask students (and the public purse) to pay tuition fees in
to recognize the mentorship and training performed by third
exchange. This integration, in my opinion, should be the focus of
parties. If it chooses to recognize outside experiences that did not expanded experiential education at McGill.
involve significant time and labour by McGill employees, it should
not charge students to do so. It should also reflect very seriously In short, while experiential learning has great potential, some
on its practice of requiring students to pay to obtain credits for
serious reflection is required before we expand its use further in
designing and delivering student-led seminars, a situation that
order to ensure it is not exploitative.
seems particularly exploitative.
1
Our Faculty should also be a staunch advocate for its students,
See Interpretation Guide, “Interpretation” of section 40 of the Act Respecting Labour Standards.
insisting that we are valuable enough to be paid for the time
and effort that we expend. McGill is a leader in the Quebec legal
market, and we are constantly told that our graduates are sought
after. It’s time for the Faculty to walk the talk and insist that this
translates into fair wages for work performed, no matter how
meaningful or prestigious the opportunity.
School
of
Community
and Public
Affairs
TEMPORARY FOREIGN WORKERS:
OPPORTUNITY OR MISFORTUNE?
February 3, 2015, from 6:15 pm to 8:30 pm
Concordia University, 1455 De Maisonneuve Blvd, Montreal, QC
H3G 1M8, 7th floor Hall Building H-763
The School of Community and Public Affairs at Concordia invites
the McGill Law community to a public panel on February 3,
regarding the current Temporary Foreign Worker’s Program in
Canada and the various approaches to render the program more
efficient.
- Marisa Berry Mendez (Settlement policy director at the Canadian Council for Refugees)
- Enrique Llanes (community organizer with the Immigrant Worker’s Center)
Moderator:
- Brigitte Noel (CBC Journalist)
More specifically, the guests will be describing the different
contexts in which they work, while addressing the Charter of
Rights as well as migrant worker’s rights. Each panellist will get
the opportunity to present their experiences and perspective on
Guests Speakers include:
the approach for that they trust to be the most adequate way of
- Eugenie Depatie-Pelletier (Migrant Worker’s Rights coordinator)
changing the current Temporary Foreign Worker’s Program.
QN •
3 FEV 2015
• 22
MIGNAULT
MOOT
CONCOURS DE PLAIDOIRIE PIERREBASILE MIGNAULT/MIGNAULT MOOT
Après six longues années, le Concours de plaidoirie Pierre-Basile
Mignault revient à McGill les 6 et 7 février 2015!
After six long years, the Mignault Moot is coming once again to
McGill!
Les étudiants des six facultés canadiennes de droit civil vont débattre un jugement fictif devant les juges de la Cour suprême du
Canada, de la Cour supérieure du Québec et de la Cour d’appel
du Québec pour remporter des prix prestigieux.
On February 6th and 7th 2015, students from the six Canadian
faculties of Civil Law will be debating in front of judges from the
Supreme Court of Canada, the Superior Court of Quebec and the
Court of Appeal of Quebec to win prestigious awards.
Vous êtes conviés à assister à cette compétition et à encourager
les équipes de McGill!
You are invited to attend this competition and support your
McGill teams!
QUAND?
6 février 2015 : 8h30 à 17h (rondes éliminatoires)
7 février 2015 : 10h à 11h (joute finale)
WHEN?
February 6th 2015: 8:30 am to 5 pm (elimination rounds)
February 7th 2015: 10 am to 11 am (final round)
OÙ?
Salle du Tribunal-École Maxwell-Cohen, Pavillon New Chancellor
Day, Faculté de droit de l’université McGill
WHERE?
Maxwell-Cohen Moot Court, New Chancellor Day Hall, McGill Law
Faculty
LES JUGES?
THE JUDGES?
Rondes éliminatoires:
Elimination rounds:
* L’honorable Pierrette Rayle, Cour d’appel du Québec (à la
* The Honourable Pierrette Rayle, Court of Appeal of Quebec
retraite) (présidente)
(retired) (chair)
* L’honorable David Collier, Cour supérieure du Québec
* The Honourable David Collier, Superior Court of Quebec
* L’honorable Julie Veilleux, Cour du Québec
* The Honourable Julie Veilleux, Court of Quebec
Joute finale:
Final round:
* L’honorable Clément Gascon, Cour suprême du Canada
* The Honourable Clément Gascon, Supreme Court of
(président)
Canada (chair)
* L’honorable Marie Deschamps, Cour suprême du Canada (à
* The Honourable Marie Deschamps, Supreme Court of
la retraite)
Canada (retired)
* L’honorable Pierre Dalphond, Cour d’appel du Québec (à la
* The Honourable Pierre Dalphond, Court of Appeal of Queretraite)
bec (retired)
VOS ÉQUIPES DE MCGILL?
Appelants:
Frédérique Horwood
Alexandra Belley-McKinnon
Intimés:
Rose Massicotte
Mariève Barcelo Després
Pour plus d’informations : http://concourspbm.
ca/
YOUR MCGILL TEAMS?
Appellants:
Frédérique Horwood
Alexandra Belley-McKinnon
Respondents:
Rose Massicotte
Mariève Barcelo Després
For more information: http://concourspbm.ca/
QN •
3 FEB 2015
• 23
colloque
présente le
interfacultaire
de la
ADED
Confédération des associations
des étudiantes et étudiants en droit civil
à l’Université de Sherbrooke
les 7 & 8 mars 2015
20 conférences de professionnels du droit
banquet, hébergement & cocktail
300 participants des 6 universités
Billets disponibles auprès de votre association étudiante dès février
plus d’informations sur la page www.facebook.com/cadedcanada
Law I
SIMONE
ABA
AKYIANU
THINKING ABOUT EQUITY AND
INCLUSION
The Preamble to Regulations in support of curricular renewal
states that the Faculty of Law at McGill University is committed to “leadership in innovative legal education”, “scholarship
across disciplinary and cultural boundaries”, and the “training of
cosmopolitan jurists.” While the Committee’s intent to enhance
the transformative quality of legal education is clear, equity and
inclusion should be better prioritized.
Some of the high points of the Report include: the incorporation
of an Indigenous framework into the property course, the introduction of a capstone project, and increased opportunities for
experiential learning. The focus on experiential learning and the
capstone project present unique opportunities to develop creative lawyering skills and to collaborate in group projects. Speaking
as a student parent in particular, participating in experiential
learning opportunities may offer flexibility in day-to-day studentfamily balance and encourages engagement in areas of interest.
and comparative legal education in ways that do not derive explicitly from a Western liberal lens.
The report also stresses that the Faculty believes legal education
calls upon “students and professors to deeply question operating assumptions about law and to seriously engage with law’s
philosophical, historical, and social content.” Based on my experiences in first year thus far, I am skeptical of the extent to which
students are able and encouraged to do this. Often, cases are
presented in a deeply apolitical and ahistorical manner, lacking
in the context necessary to critically interrogate the substantive
outcomes and legal reasoning of judges.
To present law in this manner perpetuates both ideological and
material systems of structural violence that determine the distribution of social, economic and legal benefits in the first place. It
also means that many of the narratives of racialized and indigenous communities are left out of the classroom altogether. Even
At the same time, the increase in mandatory courses in second
when stories of individuals or communities of colour are included
year may pose significant challenges for student parents who are in classroom discussions, they tend to be presented in ways that
attempting to organize a schedule that fits with family and school presume their passivity as “recipients” being acted upon by the
demands. In taking the mandatory six courses this first year, I had law. Such portrayals profoundly dehumanize and disregard the
to make sacrifices in terms of my involvement in volunteer and
agency of people of colour, as well as their resilience and capacity
student activities, not to mention in my own self-care practices.
to determine their own lives.
The end of the first semester was a particularly challenging
period for me and it did not help that new course material was
The Report is also silent on evaluative methods and forms of
introduced the week before exams. The mandatory course load
teaching. There is no comment about methods of evaluation, the
has further implications when we consider that provincial loan
amount of readings given, the time courses are offered or the
schemes such as OSAP impose requirements of full-time study
impact such work has on students with family responsibilities,
in order to access funding. Having regard for the undue burdens and the wider student body whom we know deals with issues
course requirements may pose for students juggling multiple
of mental health, ranging from exhaustion to anxiety and other
responsibilities should be an important part of the curriculum
forms of psycho-social stress.
reform process.
Additionally, the curriculum reform project should go hand in
Absent from the proposed changes to the curriculum is the imhand with active recruitment policies that aim to increase the
portance of diversity and equity, with respect to race and social
enrolment of low-income individuals, student parents, racialized
justice more generally. The Report continuously emphasizes
and indigenous students. If we are really to do justice to notions
“comparative approaches” beyond the Canadian lens. However, of pluralism and the aim of producing “well-rounded” jurists,
I find myself wondering what exactly is meant by comparative?
a commitment to equity and inclusion is key. I hope that the
And what traditions or perspectives will actually be compared?
curriculum reform process will spur dialogue and action in these
An emphasis on “comparative analysis” does not necessarily
areas.
guarantee or imply that the context or frame within which material will be taught will offer a critical lens on the legal issues and
cases raised in class. Courses and perspectives such as critical
race theory and feminist legal theory are presently absent from
the mandatory curriculum scheme, and have been relegated to
one-week sessions or brief interactions in a course. I hope the
Committee will consider what it means to engage in transsytemic
QN •
3 FEB 2015
• 25
Librarian
svetlana
kochkina
LAW LIBRARY NEWS
New Additions to our Digitised Collections:
Law Exams from 1861-1896 and Mooters scrapbook from 19151916
We all know that e-exams for the past years are not available
for the faculty of law. Not to exactly fill this gap, but to at least
provide you with an insight into how the exams looked like
for the 19th century McGill law students, we have digitized a
volume from our Rare Books Collection that gathers the examination questions for the years 1861-1896. You can find there for
example, the questions for the sessional examinations on the Civil
Code for the second and third year students that were held on
Tuesday, March 5th, 1872.
Another glimpse into the student life of the days bygone is
allowed by the scrapbook made by law students preparing for
moot completion in in 1915-1916. The book contains handwritten
accounts of the meetings, clippings from contemporary newspapers, a typewritten case Brown vs. Jones assigned to the students
and the moot court decision.
QN •
3 FEV 2015
• 26
Both books are now available for viewing and downloading via
WorldCat:
Examinations: http://mcgill.worldcat.org/oclc/893611291
Reports of moot trials: http://mcgill.worldcat.org/
oclc/893611839
Law Library blog, Facebook & Twitter
The Law Library is on social media:
• Read Law Library’s blog http://blogs.library.mcgill.ca/lawlibrary/
• Like our Facebook page http://www.facebook.com/NahumGelberLaw.Library
• Follow us on Twitter https://twitter.com/McGillLawLibrar