University of Toronto Law School Faculty Blog

Securities law needs more enforcement, not more laws

Originally posted on Lawyers Weekly: http://www.lawyersweekly.ca/index.php?section=article&articleid=640

Many commentators believe that securities law violations are under-enforced and under-prosecuted in Canada. But quite apart from securities regulatory enforcement, what is the role of the criminal law in the enforcement of financial crimes? Criminal prosecutions are necessary not simply as a supplement to the quasi-criminal jurisdiction of securities regulators, but as a first line in the enforcement of financial crimes. But criminal law has been virtually unused for this purpose even though the law on the books is wholly sufficient. This is because its enforcement and application is the “weak link” in the process.

Consider the purposes in Ontario’s Securities Act which are “to provide protection to investors from unfair, improper or fraudulent practices; and to foster fair and efficient capital markets and confidence in capital markets.” In the quasi-criminal context, where the securities commission pursues an enforcement action in provincial court, the commission is bound to adhere to these objectives and, when adjudicating the matter, the provincial court is similarly bound. So the objectives of securities law are generally prospective and preventative for capital markets.

Dunsmuir: Can the Standard of Review be Solved?

On Friday, March 7, 2008, the Supreme Court released Dunsmuir v. New Brunswick (2008 SCC 9), a stark reversal of the last decade of administrative law jurisprudence on the issue of the standard of review. This decision seeks to quiet the steady drumbeat of criticism of the Court's Standard of Review jurisprudence while remaining true to the culture of deference. The centrepiece of the judgment is the collapsing of the standard of patent unreasonableness and the standard of reasonableness simpliciter into a single standard of reasonableness. While this move responds to the concern over arcane and artificial distinctions between shades of unreasonableness, it is unlikely to solve the standard of review dilemma, for the reasons explored below [note, a version of this comment was posted under the title "Dunsmuir: Plus ça change" with TheCourt.ca]

Collectivizing Rights; Privatizing Taxation: The Unarticulated Function of Copyright Collectives

The recent proposal from the Songwriters Association of Canada to fully legalize peer-to-peer file sharing of music by adding a $5 monthly charge to the cost of Internet access (and similar proposals floating south of the border) has brought renewed attention in the role of levies and tariffs collected by copyright collectives in Canada.  I am now beginning a research project that looks at the broader implications of the expansion of collective administration of copyrights and the use of levies and tariffs.  Since the topic is current, I thought I'd use the blog not only for sharing some of my initial thoughts, but hopefully, to solicit some ideas that will help me to shape them.  Therefore, I'm posting below the description of the project and the questions  it seeks to answer.  Comments on or off the blog will be highly appreciated.  Here it is:

Migrating Same Sex Marriages

I have just posted a new article on SSRN entitled "Betwixt and Between Recognition: Migrating Same Sex Marriages and the Turn to the Private".   

The paper looks at some parallels  between conflict of laws cases and New York Times wedding annoucements in recognizing same sex marriage. Here is the abstract:

"The paper explores migrating same sex marriages - that is, same-sex marriages or civil unions entered in one jurisdiction that migrate to another and seek recognition, calling upon the private law of conflicts.

Bill C-10 - When funding becomes Censorship

There is a new censorship kafuffle in town. It’s Bill C-10, which will restrict tax credits to film and television productions deemed offensive and "contrary to public policy" by the Ministry of Heritage. The arts community is rightly up in arms, condemning the Bill as government censorship. But, the government, along with more than a few supporters, insists that this isn’t censorship. Artists are free to make art, they say, just not on the government’s tab.

So, just what is censorship, exactly?

New Articles Available Online: On Competition Law and Intellectual Property, and on Patents and Phramaceuticals Regulation

Two articles of mine have been recently published and are available online.  The first article, published in 49 Arizona Law Review is Making Sense of Nonsense: Intellectual Property, Antitrust, and Market Power.  Here's the abstract:

While the economic rationale for intellectual property ("IP") rights rests on the concepts of "monopoly" or "market power," the U.S. Supreme Court, in Illinois Tool Works v. Independent Ink, has recently joined a "virtual consensus" among antitrust commentators believing that no presumption of market power should exist in antitrust cases involving IP. This Article critically analyzes this consensus, and clarifies the relationship between IP and market power, shows why IP rights often do confer market power in the antitrust sense, but also explains why acknowledging this should not necessarily lead to oversized application of antitrust law to IP.