Congratulations to Ubaka Ogbogu on defence of dissertation on Vaccination Law in Ontario and Nova Scotia, 1800-1924

Good news from the University of Alberta Faculty of Law via Twitter (UofA Faculty of Law @UofALawFaculty)  that Ubaka Ogbogu has successfully defended his doctoral dissertation at the U of T Faculty of Law on Vaccination and the Law in Ontario and Nova Scotia, 1800-1924.

Here's the notice:

The University of Alberta, Faculty of Law would like to offer its sincerest congratulations to our colleague Professor Ubaka Ogbogu for successfully defending his doctoral thesis at theUniversity of Toronto Faculty of Law in September, 2014. He will graduate with a Doctor of Juridical Science (SJD) degree this Fall.

Professor Ogbogu’s doctoral dissertation, titled ‘Vaccination and the Law in Ontario and Nova Scotia (1800 – 1924)’ provides an original, comprehensive account of vaccination law and policy in nineteenth century Canada, encompassing the factors and ideologies that triggered and shaped the legal regulation of smallpox vaccination, the processes, design, content and outcomes of legal regulation, challenges associated with the implementation and enforcement of vaccination laws, and the influence or impact of broader social and political arrangements and norms. It also provides a firsthand account of why and to what extent mandatory approaches to vaccination were utilized in preventing the introduction and spread of smallpox, how such approaches were fashioned, and the reasons why they succeeded or failed to achieve stated regulatory aims.

According to Professor Ogbogu, “the issue of whether governments can justifiably require individuals to get vaccinated for the sake of protecting public health has always been and remains one of the most divisive social and regulatory issues in Canada and many other countries around the world.” He adds: “I feel very privileged to have had the opportunity to conduct an in-depth study on the issue, and I look forward to applying the knowledge and skills gained from the doctorate to enriching the academic lives of our students and everyone at U of A Law.”

Ubaka Ogbogu is an Assistant Professor cross-appointed to the Faculties of Law and Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical Sciences. He teaches Torts, Law and Medicine, Pharmacy Law and Ethics and the Health Law Moot Program. His research interests are in health law, public health law, science and health policy studies, law, bioethics and biomedicine, legal history of public health and health care in Canada and the law of torts (with a special focus on medical malpractice and health care torts). He is particularly interested in the points of confrontation between ethics, morality, economics and law, particularly in relation to the governance of novel and controversial health care technologies. Professor Ogbogu holds a research appointment as the Katz Research Fellow in Health Law and Science Policy and he is a member of the Faculty’s Health Law Institute.

Professor Ogbogu would like to thank the members of his dissertation committee, including Professors Trudo Lemmens (Toronto, co-supervisor), Jim Phillips (Toronto, co-supervisor), Philip Girard (Osgoode, external), Angela Fernandez (Toronto, internal-external), Martin Friedland (Toronto, internal-external) and Angela Miles (Toronto, Chair). He would also like to thank Sarah Hamill, Maeghan Toews, Adam Ollenberger, Carmelita Robertson and the wonderful staff at the Archives of Nova Scotia, Archives of Ontario, Argyle Township Court House Archives and the Halifax Regional Municipality Archives for research and editorial assistance, and colleagues at the Faculties of Law and Pharmacy and at the Health Law Institute for support and advice during his doctoral studies. Finally, Professor Ogbogu would like to thank his wonderful family and friends for their never-ending support and encouragement.

Call for Papers: The Scholar, Teacher, Judge, and Jurist in a Mixed Jurisdiction, at McGill, June 2015

Via the Canadian Association of Law and Society/Association Canadienne Droit et Societe.

English follows:

« Le chercheur, le professeur, le juge et le juriste

dans une juridiction mixte »

La World Society of Mixed Jurisdiction Jurists est heureuse d’annoncer son Quatrième Congrès International, qui se tiendra à la Faculté de droit de l’Université McGill (Montréal, Canada). Le Congrès débutera avec une réception suivie d’une conférence le 24 Juin en soirée et se poursuivra jusqu’au 26 juin 2015. Le thème de ce congrès sera « Le chercheur, le professeur, le juge et le juriste dans une juridiction mixte ».

Les juridictions mixtes, comme elles sont traditionnellement perçues, se situent à l’intersection de la tradition de la Common law et de la tradition civiliste. Elles comprennent souvent d’autres droits, comme le droit ethnique  ou le droit religieux. Riches du point de vue de l’histoire du droit et du pluralisme juridique, elles sont souvent vues comme des laboratoires naturels de droit comparé.

Les lois, les méthodes et les institutions des juridictions mixtes reflètent inévitablement la présence de différentes traditions rivalisant pour la suprématie ou demandant la réconciliation. La complexité accrue des juridictions mixtes donne lieu à des exigences particulières pour la formation des juges, des juristes et du personnel des tribunaux, l’enseignement du droit privé, la recherche scientifique et la réforme du droit. Dans quelle mesure ces défis ont-ils été relevés par les parties prenantes des juridictions mixtes?

Nous proposons d’explorer ces questions.

Nous accepterons les propositions de textes sur tout sujet apparenté au droit des juridictions mixtes. Elles pourront être soumises par des juristes de toute juridiction, qu’ils soient membres de l’Association ou non. Les propositions devront être envoyées au secrétaire général du WSMJJ, Seán Patrick Donlan (sean.donlan@ul.ie) d’ici le 15 octobre 2014. Les soumissions ne doivent pas dépasser 500 mots et doivent être accompagnées d’un curriculum vitae d’une page. Le temps alloué pour la présentation des textes ne dépassera pas 20 minutes. La publication des textes présentés à la conférence sera envisagée.

L’Association regrette de ne pas pouvoir couvrir les frais de déplacement des participants au Congrès.

Veuillez prendre la date en note.

The Fourth Worldwide Congress

of The World Society of Mixed Jurisdiction Jurists

McGill University Faculty of Law,

 Montreal, Canada June 24-26, 2015

 “The Scholar, Teacher, Judge, and Jurist in a Mixed Jurisdiction”

The World Society of Mixed Jurisdiction Jurists is pleased to announce a Fourth Worldwide Congress to be held at McGill University’s Faculty of Law (Montreal, Canada) from an opening evening reception and lecture on 24 June through 26 June 2015. The theme of the Congress will be “The Scholar, Teacher, Judge and Jurist in a Mixed Jurisdiction.”

Mixed Jurisdictions, as they are traditionally understood, stand at the crossroads of the Common law and Civil law. They also frequently encompass other ethnic and religious laws. Rich in legal history and complex pluralism, they are often seen as natural laboratories of comparative law.

The laws, methods, and institutions of mixed jurisdictions are inevitably affected by the influence and presence of different traditions vying for supremacy or requiring reconciliation. Their added complexity places special demands upon the training of judges and jurists, the staffing of courts, the teaching of private law, the research of scholars, and the task of law reform. To what extent have these challenges been met by the actors and institutions of mixed jurisdictions?

We propose to investigate these issues.

Proposals for papers on any topic related to mixed legal systems are welcome. They may be submitted by jurists from any jurisdiction, and by members and non-members of the Society alike. Proposals should be submitted to WSMJJ General Secretary Seán Patrick Donlan (sean.donlan@ul.ie) by 15 October 2014. They should not exceed 500 words and should be accompanied by a curriculum vitae of one page only. The time allocated for delivery of papers will be no longer than 20 minutes. Papers delivered at the conference will be considered for publication.

The Society regrets that it cannot cover travel expenses of participants in the Congress.

Please reserve the date. 

CJLS/RCDS: Call for Special Issue Proposals: UPDATED

The Canadian Journal of Law and Society / Revue Canadienne Droit et Société   (CJLS/RCDS) is pleased to invite proposals for our Special Issue to appear in 2016. We welcome proposals covering any topic in the field of law and society. Proposals are due by November 1st.

About the Journal: The Canadian Journal of Law and Society / Revue Canadienne Droit et Société is a bilingual periodical publishing innovative research in the broad field of law and society scholarship. Rooted in the distinctive Canadian Law and Society movement, CJLS features international scholarship concerning the intersection of law and sociology, cultural studies, literature, political science, criminology, history, human rights, gender studies and political economy. The journal is edited by Professors Benjamin L. Berger, Joane Martel, and Dawn Moore, and supported by an international editorial board comprised of leading scholars from a range of disciplines.

For rules, guidelines and a sample successful request, email CJLS_RCDS@cunet.carleton.ca.

CFP: Law in Transition - Association of Young Legal Historians Annual Forum

Via David Schorr and H-Law, a call for papers for The XXIst Annual Forum of Young Legal Historians, and 6th Berg Institute International Conference, with the theme "Law in Transition," which will take place at Tel Aviv University March 1-3, 2015.

The upcoming XXIst Annual Forum of the Association of Young Legal Historians aims at a comprehensive discussion of law in transition. A wide variety of transitions of historical significance can be explored: political, economic, social, cultural, and more. “Law”—legal symbols, discourses, players, institutions, theories, and texts—has played a significant role in historical transitions, and legal historians have been crucial in exploring its multiple and contradictory effects. The stakes are not just historical, but current: these studies encourage transitions in the way law itself is conceived, theorised, and researched.
We invite young legal historians to present papers dealing with any aspect of law in transition. (Proposals on other topics will also be considered.) Papers can explore specific events or periods in a particular region or state, or provide a comparative analysis of different periods or multiple locations. Papers can focus on local questions or deal with transnational legal justice. We welcome papers combining legal transitions with political, economic, social, and cultural ones. Methodological reflections are also welcome:  Have legal transitions been “top-down” or “bottom-up”? What have been the legal sources of transition? What are the relationships between legal and non-legal histories of transition? What conceptions of law, its forms of operation, its effects, and its significance inform the analysis of transition?
The conference's discussion formats will vary to include panels of 3-4 independent papers, roundtables, panels dedicated to a specific book (including author-meets-readers if authors can attend), and panels dedicated to a canonical article. The organising committee encourages the submission of proposals for all of these formats, and will also welcome new and exploratory formats.
Presentations may be given in any major language, but English-language presentations are likely to receive the widest audience.
The deadline for proposals is 1 November 2014; please emailForum2015@aylh.org. Decisions will be made quickly.
-          Proposals for individual papers should include an abstract of up to 350 words and a short c.v.
-          Proposals for full panels should include, in addition to individual paper proposals, an abstract introducing the theme of the panel.
-          Proposals for roundtables should include an introduction of theme, abstracts of presenters’ intended comments (up to 100 words for each presenter), and a short c.v. for each participant.
-          Proposals for panels discussing a single book or article should include a full citation of the book or article, an explanation of its significance, abstracts of the papers, and a short c.v. for each participant.
The conference fee will be ILS 450 (approximately 95 Euro). The program will include social events and tours.
Discounted conference fees and accommodation at a nominal charge will be available for participants with no institutional funding. Applicants requesting such support should explain their request in a document accompanying their submission.
The Call for Papers can be found here. Further information about the Association of Young Legal Historians and past Annual Forums can be found at www.aylh.org. Please direct any questions about the conference to Forum2015@aylh.org.
The conference is sponsored by the David Berg Foundation Institute for Law and History, Buchmann Faculty of Law, Tel Aviv University, with the support of the TAU Office of the Vice President, Cegla Center for Interdisciplinary Research, Entin Faculty of Humanities, and Yavetz Graduate School of Historical Studies.
We look forward to welcoming you to Tel Aviv.
The Organising Committee: Omer Aloni, Yael Braudo-Bahat, Doreen Lustig, Dina Moyal, Anat Rosenberg, David Schorr

Binnema, "Protecting Indian Lands by Defining Indian: 1850-76"

In the current issue of Journal of Canadian Studies/Revue d'études canadiennes , an article by Ted Binnema of UNBC entitled "Protecting Indian Lands by Defining Indian: 1850-76". 

Here's the abstract:

Abstract:

In 1850, the government of the Province of Canada defined Indian for the first time. In the twentieth century, the legal provisions by which generations of status Indian women in Canada lost their status when they married non-status men became among the most controversial aspects of Canadian legislation relating to First Nations peoples. The government’s decision to define Indian, and its actual definitions, came to exemplify the coercive nature of Canadian Indian policy. This essay challenges many assumptions regarding the history of Canada’s definition of Indian. A close examination shows that officials only reluctantly decided to define Indian in law in 1850 in efforts to protect Indian land in Lower Canada. The evidence also shows that the first legal definition ofIndian was intended to conform to the “ancient customs and traditions” of these Indigenous communities. Furthermore, government officials consulted meaningfully with Aboriginal leaders when they revised the definition between 1851 and 1876. During the entire period, the Aboriginal political elite were effective advocates for their own interests.

Abstract:

En 1850, le gouvernement de la Province du Canada a défini le terme indien pour la première fois. Au XX^e siècle, les dispositions légales qui avaient entraîné la perte du statut de plusieurs générations de femmes indiennes au Canada lorsqu’elles avaient épousé des non-Indiens en viennent à représenter un aspect parmi les plus controversés de la législation canadienne visant les Premières nations. La décision du gouvernement de définir le terme indien, et sa définition même, ont fini par illustrer la nature coercitive des politiques indiennes du Canada. Le présent article questionne plusieurs des hypothèses sur l’historique de la définition canadienne du terme indien. Un examen approfondi montre que les autorités ont finalement décidé avec beaucoup de réticence de définir le terme indien dans la loi en 1850 afin de pouvoir protéger les terres indiennes dans le Bas-Canada. Les éléments probants montrent également que la première définition légale du terme indien visait à se conformer aux « coutumes et traditions anciennes » des communautés indigènes. Les représentants du gouvernement ont consulté véritablement les leaders autochtones lorsqu’ils ont révisé la définition entre 1851 et 1876. Pendant toute cette période, l’élite politique autochtone a plaidé efficacement en faveur de ses propres intérêts.

Harris and Au on the Abolition of Notice in Title Registration of Real Property in BC in SSRN

Doug Harris of UBC Faculty of Law and former student May Au have posted "Title Registration and the Abolition of Notice in British Columbia" on SSRN. The article will be published in The UBC Law Review. 

Abstract:

Systems of land law must balance competing goals of securing title for existing interests in land with facilitating their transfer. Title registration systems operate to facilitate transfers of interests in land. They reflect a choice to enhance the security of transfers of interests, providing what has been characterized as dynamic security at the expense of the static security of existing interests. One of the cardinal principles of title registration is the abolition of the doctrine of notice. In equity, if purchasers of a legal interest have notice of a prior equitable interest, then they take their interest subject to that prior interest. To do otherwise is to perpetrate a fraud. Most title registration systems abolish notice; prior unregistered interests do not affect purchasers who register their interests, whether or not they have notice of the prior interest, except, so many title registration statutes provide, in the case of fraud. This article investigates the evolution of provisions purporting to abolish notice in Torrens title jurisdictions, it describes the variety of provisions that emerged, it reviews the longstanding uncertainty in British Columbia over the extent to which the doctrine of notice is abolished, and it considers a number of proposals for reform. It concludes that the uncertainty is a function of an unresolved policy choice between static and dynamic security, and that the British Columbia Court of Appeal or the legislature needs to intervene to clarify that choice.

McNeil on Indigenous Rights Litigation, Legal History, and the Role of Experts

Kent McNeil of Osgoode Hall Law School has what looks like an intriguing article in the Summer 2014 issue of the Saskatchewan Law Review, "Indigenous Rights Litigation, Legal History, and the Role of Experts."
Abstract unavailable.

Updated Fall 2014 Schedule for Legal History Group

2014 Fall Schedule: Osgoode Society Legal History Group

** All sessions will be held at the University of Toronto, in Victoria College (Old Vic building) Room 211 except October 1, which will  be held in Northrup Frye Hall, Room 008 **
Exit the subway at Museum Station, east exit. Old Vic is to the southeast of the Birge-Carnegie Library, where we met last year. The Northrup Frye building is to the south of the Birge-Carnegie Library and Emmanuel College, backing on Queen's Park Circle. For a map of U of T, see here.

Wednesday September 10 - Ian Kyer, "Equity and the Private Sector Service Provider: The Battle between the City of Toronto and the Toronto Railway Company in the Privy Council"

Wednesday September 24 - by author request, name dedacted,  “Testamentary Archeology in Late-Victorian Ontario: William Martin’s Little, Posthumous Legal System"

Wednesday October 1 –*new* Paul Craven, York University, "Imagining a low law history of labour arbitration in Ontario"

Wednesday October 15 - Sam McLean, King's College, London: "Courts-Martial and the Creation of the Early-Modern Royal Navy"

Wednesday October 29 - Joseph Dunlop, University of Toronto: "The Catholic Legislator in a Pluralistic Society: From Pierre Trudeau to Paul Martin."

November 5 - Reading Week

Wednesday November 12 - Philip Girard, Osgoode Hall Law School: TBA

Wednesday November 26 – Art Linton, Magna Carta Canada, TBA

***Wednesday December 3 – Dennis Molinaro, University of Toronto, "Liberal Communists and Communist Liberals: Section 98 and Civil Rights in Canada." ** Note new date

Rueck on Commons, Enclosure, and Resistance in Kahnawá:ke Mohawk Territory, 1850-1900

In the new issue of the Canadian Historical Review, an article by Daniel Rueck, entitled, "Commons, Enclosure, and Resistance in Kahnawá:ke Mohawk Territory, 1850-1900".

Here's the abstract:

Historical communities that have held lands in common have, without exception, had strict regulations for using those lands. This was true also in Kahnawá:ke, a Mohawk community near Montreal, where community leaders articulated and enforced customary land laws until the last decades of the nineteenth century. Although a few Mohawks contested these laws in the nineteenth century, the Canadian government undermined, dismantled, and replaced customary land law in the 1870s and 1880s. This article reveals the way the Canadian Department of Indian Affairs exacerbated resource and land shortages in its attempts to undermine Kahnawá:ke leaders, gain control of the land, and ultimately to disperse the community. It describes a chaotic transition from regulated common property to a form of private property under the Indian Act and argues that this transformation was part of a global enclosure movement that continues to this day. Nevertheless, the Canadian government was unable to bring its project to completion, in large part the result of effective resistance offered by Kahnawá:ke Mohawks. The article draws attention to the extraordinary nature of this successful Indigenous resistance to the Canadian state in the late nineteenth century.