- CASE ARCHIVE -
Environmental Law
2023/2024
For the 2024 UBC Moot Court case, we pursued an environmental law case that challenged participants to assess the municipal government’s responsibility over environmental protection.
SCENARIO:
The appellant, Anderson Explosives Ltd. (“A.E”), was conducting blasting operations for a highway widening project when the operation went awry, and rock debris known as “fly‑rock” was propelled into the air by an explosion. The fly‑rock shot approximately 90 meters in the air and damaged a home and a car. A significant amount of rock also landed in the yard. A.E. did not report the incident to the Ministry of the Environment (“Ministry”) and was subsequently charged with failing to report to the Ministry the discharge of a contaminant into the natural environment contrary to section 15(1) of the Environmental Protection Act (“EPA”). The Ontario Court of Justice acquitted A.E. The Ontario Superior Court of Justice set aside the acquittal and entered a conviction. A majority in the Court of Appeal dismissed A.E’s appeal.
Employment Law
2022/2023
For the 2023 UBC Moot Court case, we pursued an employment case that challenged participants to assess whether or not the implemented policy constituted a prima facie case of adverse effect (indirect) discrimination or a direct discriminatory practice within the meaning of section 10 of the Act.
SCENARIO:
Toronto Dominion (TD) Bank introduced an alcohol and substance abuse policy requiring all new and returning employees to undergo a urine drug test within 48 hours of accepting a job offer. The policy mandates dismissal for those refusing the test or failing to succeed in rehabilitation services provided by the bank if they test positive. Users of illicit drugs, whether recreational or otherwise, could lose employment under the condition that they test positively on at least three occasions. The Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA) argued that the policy was discriminatory, but the tribunal disagreed. The CCLA appealed to the Federal Court of Canada, which must decide if the substance abuse policy appeal should be upheld or dismissed.
Immigration Law
2021/2022
Criminal Law
2020/2021
For the 2022 UBC Moot Court case, we pursued an immigration case that challenged participants to assess multiple outcomes of an appeal hearing.
SCENARIO:
The appellant, Hassan Ahmed, is a citizen of the United Kingdom with Canadian permanent resident status. He has a Canadian wife and a successful business that has helped his community throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. However, Mr. Ahmed is convicted of theft under $5,000 on two separate occasions and receives a removal order from the Canadian Immigration and Refugee Board for criminality. The issue is whether Mr. Ahmed’s order for removal should be appealed or confirmed. With humanitarian and compassionate considerations being valid in this circumstance, should the appeal for Mr. Ahmed’s removal order be allowed, given that it would risk the livelihood he built in Canada and separate him from his wife? Or is this removal justified, and should the appeal be dismissed, given Mr. Ahmed’s crimes and the high potential for him to rebuild his life as an educated 27-year-old man in the United Kingdom?
For the 2021 UBC Moot Court case, we pursued a criminal case that challenged participants to assess multiple outcomes of a murder trial.
SCENARIO:
After an arduous relationship with his boss, his marriage, and his mental health, the accused plans to murder his boss out of revenge. The accused breaks into his boss’ home, stabs him with a knife, and flees the scene, leaving behind indisputable evidence. Unknowingly, however, the victim was already deceased prior to the stabbing due to a heart attack. This bears the question, should the accused be charged with attempted murder? What other charges should be tried in this matter?