Alberta Law Libraries will be closed on Tuesday, September 30th, 2025 to commemorate National Day for Truth and Reconciliation.
Stay Current
Shodunke v Alberta, 2025 ABCA 320
[1] Olufemi Shodunke appeals the summary dismissal of his claim against His Majesty the King in right of Alberta (Alberta) and the Attorney General of Canada (Canada). He was arrested in August 2018 on charges of possession and distribution of child pornography. The charges were stayed in August 2020. In May 2022, the appellant commenced civil proceedings against Alberta and Canada, seeking remedies for seizure of his personal property and breach of his Charter rights, including 10 million dollars in damages. He applied for summary judgment, Alberta cross-applied to strike the claim and for summary dismissal, and Canada cross-applied for summary dismissal only. The application was dismissed and both cross-applications were granted.
Continue reading “Shodunke v Alberta, 2025 ABCA 320”
R v Paul, 2025 ABCA 319
[1] The appellant was convicted of manslaughter contrary to section 236 and breach of probation contrary to section 733.1 of the Criminal Code, RSC 1985, c C-46. He was subsequently sentenced to 7 and ½ years for manslaughter, and 6 months for breach of probation to be served concurrently.
Continue reading “R v Paul, 2025 ABCA 319”
Pickle v University of Lethbridge, 2025 ABCA 318
[1] Jonah Pickle and Frances Widdowson appeal an order of a chambers judge denying a fiat to permit the filing of a second amendment to an Originating Application for Judicial Review, and dismissing an application to amend that originating application to request an order pursuant to s 52 of the Constitution Act, 1982, being Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (UK), 1982, c 11, striking down certain provisions of the Occupational Health and Safety Act, SA 2020, c O- 2.2, ss 1(n), (rr), 2(a), and 3(1)(c).
[2] This appeal turns on whether the chambers judge’s exercise of discretion in refusing the fiat and amendment application constituted an error of law or principle, or was wholly unreasonable when he determined that the proposed amendment would change “the fundamental nature of this proceeding, mak[ing] it bigger, more complicated and unnecessarily so”, in attempting to attack the constitutionality of the Occupational Health and Safety Act, legislation not “really engaged” in the dispute between the parties.
[3] For the reasons below, the appeal is dismissed.
Continue reading “Pickle v University of Lethbridge, 2025 ABCA 318”
R v Greene, 2025 ABCA 314
[1] The appellant appeals a sentence of four and a half years for child luring (s 172.1(1)(b), Criminal Code, RSC 1985, c C-46) and six months concurrent for indecent exposure (s 173(2)). The trial judge stayed a conviction for making sexually explicit material available to a child (s 171.1(1)(b)) pursuant to R v Kienapple, 1974 CanLII 14 (SCC), [1975] 1 SCR 729. The appellant was given credit for 360 days for pre-sentence custody, leaving three and a half years to be served.
[2] The offending conduct occurred from January 1, 2018 to July 4, 2022 when the appellant was 20 to 25 years old. The victim was 11 to 15 years old at the time. The appellant had no prior criminal record. Both the appellant and the victim are Indigenous.
Continue reading “R v Greene, 2025 ABCA 314”
R. v. Sheppard, 2025 SCC 29
Date: September 26, 2025
On Appeal from the Court of Appeal for Alberta
Criminal law — Sentencing — Appeals — Standard of review — Error in principle — Sufficiency of reasons — Factual findings — Application of contemporary sentencing principles to historical sexual offences against children — Offender sentenced to six years’ incarceration following convictions by jury for historical offences of sexual interference and invitation to sexual touching committed against child — Majority of Court of Appeal reducing sentence on basis that sentencing judge erred in principle by giving insufficient reasons for her factual findings and by declining to consider sentencing jurisprudence existing before Friesen when determining fit sentence — Whether sentencing judge committed errors in principle justifying appellate intervention.
Continue reading “R. v. Sheppard, 2025 SCC 29”