Who speaks for whom? Implementing the Crown's duty to consult in the case of divided Aboriginal political structures

The Supreme Court of Canada has determined that the Crown has a duty to consult Aboriginal peoples on government decisions that may adversely affect their rights, but the Court did not define who the Crown should consult on behalf of Aboriginal people when two or more groups claim the right to speak for them. For government officials attempting to fulfil the Crown's duty, this can create challenges. This article reviews the jurisprudence and scholarly commentary to provide some guidance to government officials on how to effectively implement the Crown's duty to consult as a practical matter of public administration.     

With Revolutionary Battery Tech,We Can Shift Global Energy To Renewables

Inventor and investor Bill Joy describes a breakthrough technology that can speed the de‐carbonization of the planet.     

Maintaining professionalism: emotional labor among lawyers as client advisors

Dominant professional ideology dictates that lawyers behave professionally toward clients by using logical, rational reasoning and expression and by leaving emotion and personal feelings out of their work. However, this ideology overlooks the fact that lawyers who work in settings that feature high client contact often labor under very emotionally charged circumstances. As a result, lawyers must use emotional labor to cope with their own feelings while maintaining their professional display. Using qualitative data based on semi-structured interviews with twenty lawyers in the Midwestern United States, I show that the lawyers interviewed in this study cope with their own feelings by using emotional labor to suppress the spontaneous expression of personal feelings, while working to evoke a display of emotions that does not run afoul of traditional standards of legal professionalism. Their use of emotional labor to cope with their feelings came in four forms: expression of genuine emotion, deep acting, surface acting, and detachment. The findings suggest that despite wide scholarly discussion of alternative conceptions of professionalism, the need to expand these discussions among law students and practitioners is still pressing.     

Arbitration in financial dispute resolution: the final step to reconstructing the default(s) and exception(s)?

In this article, I argue for caution in embracing family arbitration as a new form of private ordering for resolving parties' financial disputes. I explain that family arbitration may be more successful than other forms of private ordering and final court hearings in enabling certain types of parties to resolve certain types of disputes. I consider why family arbitration may not become numerically significant despite its potential benefits, but may be much more important in normative terms. Lawyer-led negotiations remain the most common form of out-of-court resolution and constitute the de facto default form of bargaining in the shadow of the normative regime framed by ss 23–25 Matrimonial Causes Act 1973. Together with the transformation in approach to nuptial agreements, family arbitration may mark a normative shift towards autonomy and private ordering. I question whether this is a desirable step for family law, at least before we have resolved the underlying policy debate.