About the program
There is a difference between citing a case and using it well. Junior lawyers often cite authority that technically supports their position but does not do the analytical work the court expects. This course is about closing that gap.
The craft of legal argument from case law
Participants will work through complex, multi-case scenarios drawn from recent Canadian appellate decisions. The emphasis is on synthesis: taking four or five cases that point in different directions and constructing a coherent argument from them. This is harder than it sounds, and most of the course time is spent on exactly this problem.
We also spend time on how courts signal their reasoning. Word choices in judgments carry weight. When a court says it is not deciding a particular question, that is itself information. Learning to read those signals changes how you assess risk in a file.
Oral argument and case theory
Two sessions involve presenting a case analysis to a small group, followed by questions from the instructor playing the role of a skeptical judge. The goal is not performance coaching. It is about stress-testing your reasoning before it matters.
The course draws on decisions from the past four years, so the material is current rather than pedagogically comfortable.
Suitable for lawyers called to the bar within the past eight years. Paralegals with advocacy experience are also welcome.