Repository logo
 

Seven years of accessible justice: a critical assessment of Hryniak v. Mauldin’s culture shift

dc.contributor.authorWhite, Robert McKay
dc.date.accessioned2023-11-22T17:01:32Z
dc.date.available2023-11-22T17:01:32Z
dc.date.issued2022
dc.description.abstractIn 2014, the Supreme Court of Canada sought to address the inaccessibility of public adjudication for “ordinary Canadians” by introducing a culture shift to civil litigation. This culture shift required participants in the civil justice system to stop viewing trial as the default adjudication method and expand use of summary judgment. In this article, I critically evaluate the Supreme Court’s reasoning for the culture shift from a jurisprudential perspective and quantitatively evaluate the endeavour’s success. I find that Alberta courts have misapplied the culture shift contrary to the Supreme Court’s intentions, that the culture shift is being implemented only on a limited basis, that summary judgment is no more accessible for ordinary Canadians, and that fairness and justice are not being preserved. I provide recommendations for alternate methods to address the accessibility problem.
dc.identifier.citationWhite, R. M. (2022). Seven Years of Accessible Justice: A Critical Assessment of Hryniak V. Mauldin’s Culture Shift. Alberta Law Review, 59(3), 611–630. https://albertalawreview.com/index.php/ALR/article/view/2688
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14078/3255
dc.language.isoen
dc.rightsAll Rights Reserved
dc.subjectadjudication
dc.subjectsummary judgment
dc.subjectAlberta
dc.titleSeven years of accessible justice: a critical assessment of Hryniak v. Mauldin’s culture shiften
dc.typeArticle

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
White-seven-years.pdf
Size:
215.63 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format