QQUUIIDD NNOOVVIIMcGill University, Faculty of Law

Volume 27, no. 11, January 30, 2007

IN THIS ISSUE...

3... Spending Money (We alldo it, but do we do it well,especially when it comes tothe environment??)

6... 10 Things I Think IThink

7... Les aventures du Capi-taine Corporate America -Les angoisses nocturnes duCapitaine II

9... A Reply to “WhenTurkey Shot Freedom”

11... Rien à dire

12... Les aventures du Capi-taine Corporate America - Ala Saint-Crépin!

The Quid Novi is published weekly by the students of the Faculty of Law at McGill University. Production is made possible through the direct support of students.

All contents copyright 2006 Quid Novi.

Les opinions exprimées sont propres aux auteurs et ne réflètent pas nécessairement celles de l’équipe du Quid Novi.

The content of this publication does not necessarily reflect the views of the McGill Law Students’ Association or of McGill University.

Envoyez vos commentaires ou articles avant jeudi 5pm à l’adresse: quid.law@mcgill.ca

Toute contribution doit indiquer l’auteur et son origine et n’est publiée qu’à la discrétion du comité de rédaction, qui basera sa décisionsur la politique de rédaction telle que décrite à l’adresse:

http://www.law.mcgill.ca/quid/epolicy/html.

Contributions should preferably be submitted as a .doc attachment.

QUID NOVI

3661 Peel StreetMontréal, Québec

H2A 1X1(514) 398-4430

www.law.mcgill.ca/quid

Editors in ChiefCaroline BriandAndrea Gorys

Assistant Editors in ChiefCassandra BrownJulien Morissette

Managing EditorsKarina KesserwanYuri Smagorinski

Layout EditorsAlison Adam

Raffaela CommodariTara Di BenedettoMaegan HoughNaomi Hauptman

Associate EditorsBruce Carlini

Lauren Chang MacLeanOana Dolea

Thomas LiptonVrouyr MakalianPalma PacioccoColin SchulhauserLéonid Sirota

Staff WritersNick DoddAlison Glaser

Alexander HermanRyan KirshenblattOlivier Plessis

Staff CartoonistLaurence Bich-Carrière

Cover ArtistIsabelle Cadotte

EDITORIALpar Caroline Briand (Law IV)Co-Redactrice en chef

QUID NOVI

2

Parlez-en bien, parlez-en mal, mais parlez-en, dit-on.Ainsi, la petite ville de Hérouxville, en Mauricie, s’estrécemment “mise sur la mappe” en se jetant à pieds

joints dans le joyeux débat médiatique sur “l’accommode-ment raisonnable”, ou, pour plus d’exactitude, sur la notionque semble en avoir ces jours-ci le corps journalistique.En effet, Hérouxville a averti les médias, et ce faisant, lereste de la population provinciale, qu’ellevenait de se doterd’un code de conduite à l’intention des immigrants. Celui-ciprécise entre autres qu’il est interdit à Hérouxville de lapi-der les femmes, ou de les brûler vives en public.Ouf! Quel soulagement! Pendant une seconde, j’ai bien cruque je vivais dans une société archaïque, où les femmessont encore considérées comme des citoyennes de secondeclasse, dont les droits fondamentaux et la dignité peuventêtre bafoués en toute impunité. Ce n’est pas comme si à Montréal, en 2007, l’emplacementdes cliniques d’avortement et d’aide aux victimes d’agres-sion sexuelles devait encore être tenu secret. Ce n’est pascomme si l’on avait encore besoin d’avertir de brillantesétudiantes qu’elles ne sont pas tenues de répondre si, enentrevue, on leur pose des questions sur leur état maritalou leur désir, même éventuel, d’avoir un jour des enfants.Ce n’est pas comme si une femme pouvait prendre inno-cemment le métro sans être exposée à longueur dejournee à des publicités sexistes dégradantes (commecelle, tout à fait honteuse, d’un jeu vidéo où l’on voit unjeune homme arborant unsourire fier mais vicieux, tenanten poche de patate, sur son épaule, une jeune femmedénudée qui se débat pour se dégager).Le “Code de conduite de Hérouxville” est un effort dans lamauvaise direction, mais qu’on se le dise: un tel effort,quand il concerne le droit des femmes à l’égalité et la dig-nité est un effort nécessaire qui se fait cruellement atten-dre. �

30 janvier 2007

Spending Money (We all do it –but do we do it well, especiallywhen it comes to the environ-ment??)by Claire Stockwell (Law II)

Being the beginning ofthe semester and all, Ihave paid many a visit

to the McGill bookstore.Prominently on display isBjorn Lomborg's latest book- How to Spend $50 Billionto Make the World a BetterPlace. You may rememberBjorn for his classic - TheSkeptical Environmentalist -which anyone who hastaken Legal Meth couldhave better researched. Butthe point of this article isnot lambaste Lomborg - theenvironmental communityhas already been there anddone that; it is to explorethe idea of how we spendmoney and whether wespend it wisely.

The Conservative govern-ment is currently burningthrough the dough, havingannounced over $2 billion infunding (over the next 14years) for renewable en-ergy, technology develop-ment, and householdenergy efficiency pro-grammes. A big enough dol-lar amount for those thatnormally slam the govern-ment for their environmen-tal record to take pause.Unfortunately, however, dur-ing this moment of reflec-tion, one will realize that theonly concept the govern-ment has grasped is that ofrecycling.

For anyone following theissue (Ooo, Ooo - that

would be me), the energyefficiency and renewableenergy programmes look alot like the Liberal ones thatwere axed soon after theConservatives took power.The slight modifications arethings like removing thesubsidy to get a home en-ergy audit in the first placeand will shift the focus toonly reimbursing homeown-ers for energy efficientmeasures actually imple-mented. Superficially, theshift seems to be meant tosupport only concrete ac-tion, yet it means thathomeowners will have tocover the $200-$300 up-front costs of the audit. Likethe brilliant tax credit weare all now taking advan-tage of for using publictransport, this type of initia-tive only gives incentives tothe converted at a timewhen we need to convert.As for the technology initia-tive, I stopped listeningafter the clean coal part. Throwing money at theissue is not normally themost efficient way toachieve results. Throwingmoney at the issue whenyou are a conservative ishardly going to win thegreen vote. And throwingmoney at an issue whosecoffers you bled dry a yearago is just not tactful.

But should we be spendingmoney at all? 20 to 50 yearsfrom now when the brunt of

the climate impacts startmanifesting themselves,won't we have the technol-ogy to fix it? Societal, envi-ronmental and economicconsiderations would allyield a resounding NO! Butlet's stick to the numbers.Sir Nicholas Stern, formerWorld Bank Chief Economistand Head of the UK Govern-ment Economic Service, is-sued his 'stern warning' (ha,ha environmentalists are socreative!!) last November.His analysis concluded thatthe costs to limit the worsteffects of climate changecan be limited to around1% of global GDP per year,but that the cost of inactionwill be at least 5% and ashigh as 20%.

This week the Intergovern-mental Panel on ClimateChange, the leading scien-tific body on the issue, willrelease the first instalmentof its latest review of cli-mate science. Reportsleaked to the press indicatethat the scientific commu-nity will agree that it is 'verylikely' that climate change iscaused by human activity.This is up from their 'likely'position of 2001 and repre-sents a shift in their confi-dence range from 66-90%to 90-99%. If only my GPAcould follow the sametrend…. With the debate on the sci-ence over and the numberson the economics in (as dis-

turbing as they are), why isthe government recyclingold programmes rather thantaking new and concretesteps to actually deal withthe issue?

But what could these stepsbe? I may not have the an-swers, but I do know thatsomeone with a much bet-ter idea of what we couldbe doing is coming to theFaculty this Thursday (whata coincidence!).

In September 2006, theCommissioner of the Envi-ronment and SustainableDevelopment, Johanne Géli-nas, tabled a report in theHouse of Commons outlin-ing how the federal govern-ment had done too little andacted too slowly onCanada's commitments toaddress the challenge of cli-mate change. She alsomade a number of recom-mendations on how themoney could be spent in thefuture and on what activi-ties. The Commissioner willbe speaking this Thursday,February 1st in the MootCourt at 11:30 am. Climate change is a problemthat we can and must fix.Plus having someone with afew more answers (or rec-ommendations at least) willbe a nice change of pacefrom the law… �

3

4

QUID NOVI

Digital Editions are permanent, portable versions of our comprehensive texts that allow the user to

perform single and multiple text keyword searches

highlight important passages

make study notes to accompany the text, and

copy and paste with built-in bibliographic support

After the initial download, no internet connection is required —Work Hassle-Free!!!

The following titles are currently available as Digital Editions:

Administrative Law by David Mullan

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 3d edition by Robert J. Sharpe & Kent Roach

The Law of Evidence, 4th edition by David Paciocco & Lee Stuesser

The Law of Partnerships and Corporations, 2d edition by J. Anthony van Duzer

Personal Property Security Law by Ronald C.C. Cuming, Catherine Walsh, & Roderick J. Wood

The Law of Trusts, 2d edition by Eileen Gillese & Martha Milczynski

All Digital Editions are offered at the same price as their corresponding print version.

Receive 10% off with the purchase of two or more Digital Editions for a limited time!!!

To obtain a Digital Edition, simply contact your school bookstore, visit VitalSource at www.

vitalsource.com, visit us at www.irwinlaw.com, or give us a call at 1.888.314.9014.

›

›

›

›

›

›

›

›

›

›

new from irwin l aw…

Digital EditionsIrwin Law, in partnership with VitalSource Technologies, is pleased to offer selected titles in the Essentials of Canadian Law Series in an exciting new digital format.

IRWIN LAW INC. Suite 206, 14 Duncan Street, Toronto, on m5h 3g8phone: 416.862.7690 toll-free: 1.888.314.9014 fax: 416.962.9236e-mail: contact@irwinlaw.com web: www.irwinlaw.com

5

JANUARY 30, 2007

Montreal, 23 January2007

–

The International Crimi-nal Defence AttorneysAssociation (ICDAA)

issued the following state-ment today regarding re-cent public statementsmade by Charles (Cully)Stimson, Deputy AssistantSecretary of Defence forDetainee Affairs, UnitedStates Defence Department.“The International CriminalDefence Attorneys Associa-tion (ICDAA) strongly con-demns all statements bygovernment officials thatfavour limiting the right ofany person accused of acrime, or in detention forany reason, to receive thelawful assistance of counsel.We particularly reject publicstatements by one official ofthe United States Govern-ment that could intimidatelawyers who are represent-ing persons detained at theU.S. military prison at Guan-tanamo Bay, Cuba.

On Thursday, 11 January2007, Charles (Cully) Stim-son, Deputy Assistant Sec-retary of Defence forDetainee Affairs, UnitedStates Defence Department,found himself at the core ofa major controversy after

making statements on Fed-eral News Radio concerninglawyers doing pro bonowork for detainees of theU.S. military prison at Guan-tanamo Bay, Cuba.During a radio interview,Stimson declared that it wasshocking that lawyers atmany top U.S. law firmsrepresent Guantanamo de-tainees. Stimson said thatcompanies might want toconsider taking their busi-ness to firms that do notrepresent suspected terror-ists, listing the names ofmore than a dozen majorfirms he believes should beboycotted. He even sug-gested that some lawyerswere not being truthfulabout their remuneration,some of which could al-legedly come from terroristorganizations.

Human Rights organizationsand lawyers in the UnitedStates and all over theworld strongly responded tothese statements. Stimsonwas strongly criticized forattacking the motivationand integrity of lawyers whodefend, on a voluntarybasis, Guantanamo de-tainees. There is a generalconcern that Stimson’sstatements could unfairlylimit the fundamental rightto due process and accessfor all to a full and complete

defence.

Following this controversy, aPentagon spokesman, Lt.Col. Brian Maka, disavowedthe comments made byStimson and specified thatthey did not represent theBush administration’s posi-tion. On Wednesday, 17January 2007, Stimson re-tracted his comments stat-ing that his words had beenmisunderstood. He alsoapologized to the concernedattorneys and law firms andsaid that he never meant tocast doubt on their integritysince he himself stronglybelieves in the sacred prin-cipal of due process.

Despite this retraction, itdoes not appear that Mr.Stimson understood the ob-jection to his comments. Inwithdrawing his comments,he stated he did not doubtthe integrity of the lawyersand law firms whose busi-nesses he had attacked.This is an important admis-sion. However, the most se-rious objection is that heattacked not the lawyers,but the right of the personsdetained at GuantanamoBay to be represented. Thisis the right that the ICDAAand all those interested inhuman rights around theworld must defend.The International Criminal

Defence Attorneys Associa-tion (ICDAA) strongly sup-ports the pro bono workdone by defence lawyersand recognizes the funda-mental value of their contri-bution to the legal system ina free and democratic soci-ety. The rich history of thepro bono work done byAmerican attorneys shouldnot be vitiated by CharlesStimson’s comments. Theyshould be encouraged tocontinue to freely and inde-pendently exercise theirprofession in order to guar-antee everyone’s access toa full defence and a fairtrial.”

For more information :

Ms. Josée Robert

Assistant Director

(514) 285-1055

admin@aiad-icdaa.org

http://www.aiad-icdaa.org

��

QUID NOVI

6

10 Things I Think I Thinkby Chima Ubani (Law III)

As expected, I took aweek off. Actually Itook two weeks off

since my first article wasmeant to be published be-fore the prediction it con-tained became impossible.But I'm back now. Enoughsmall talk, let's get down tobusiness:

1. I think that I witnessedone of the most shockingmoments I've ever seen onTV a few weeks ago. It wason the NBC trivia show “1vs. 100”. The question was:“how many six packs do youneed to have 99 bottles ofbeer on the wall?” The op-tions were: a) more than 15b) exactly 15 c) less than15. What ensued was wildstuff. The contestantthought out loud: “Well, Iknow that 10 is 60, and 20is 120, but... 99?? 15?? I'mnot a beer drinker! I don'tknow!!” Contestants arethen allowed to ask a mem-ber of the “mob” for assis-tance (sort of like a lifeline). So, she continued“hmm…well… I need to lookfor someone who is a beerdrinker...” She finally settledon someone (who appar-ently looked like he hadconsumed some beers in hislifetime. He had the follow-ing to say: “Well, 11 is 66,and 5 is 30, so that's only93 and we're already at 16.So it's got to be more than16 at least.” Wow. Aftersome more deliberation shetook a leap of faith andchose the right answer. Af-terwards, the host asks amember of the mob thatgot the question wrong (inthis case about 17 out of70!) what they were think-ing. A Maxim model had the

following to say: “Well… Idunno! I'm not a beerdrinker, I drink red wine,beer makes you bloated!”(followed by cute giggles).The whole incident was verysurreal to me.

2. I think that Coffeehouseis back! And I DON'T think itwas a coincidence that thefirst truly sponsored onewas one of the best at-tended and most fun of theyear. On that note, I thinkthat Andrew Mason de-serves kudos. I'll do my partby getting him a drink atevery sponsored Coffee-house.

3. I think that all of the lovePeyton Manning is gettinghas turned me off of theColts and forced me to backthe Bears in the Superbowl.It's a nice story and he defi-nitely earned this shot. He'sa legendary QB, no doubt.But still, enough is enough.I think the Bears are goingto come out with a real un-derdog “what about us?”mentality. Peyton's greatcomeback may have camou-flaged the Colts' defense'sreversion to its poor mid-season form. At the sametime, the Bears defenseseems to have rediscoveredsome of its brilliant midsea-son form. King Rex is goingto step up and make somebig plays. It would be prettyfunny if Peyton choked andhad a horrible game, thenwe would have a whole newreason to question him.Anyways, it should be agreat game.

4. I think that more peopleshould write articles for theQuid. It seemed like last

week's edition had more ad-vertisements than articles.That's no good. I think thisespecially because I amslaving over my computerworking hard to provide theengaging talking points thatyou are currently reading.Shame on all of you.

5. I think I agree with mygood friend Court's assess-ment that Borsao is themost drinkable and deliciouswine available in this city inits price range ($11.65). I'vesampled a whole lot ofthem, and a bottle of Bor-sao impresses every time.This vintage is mature andconfident enough to castaside the too often usedcrutch of employing oak asthin veneer in order to maska lack of real quality andsubstance. The deep redcolor shows strong tanninsthat reveal a full and robustpalate with hints of pepperyspice and ripe field berries.In his words: “The finish islike a lover's embrace thatconjures up memories oflost youth.” This last qualitygrows stronger with eachemptied bottle, so youshould have at least two.

6. I think that the Traste-vere Pizza (mozzarella,mushrooms, prosciutto andblue cheese) at PizzeriaNapoletana is becoming oneof my favourite dishes. Sodelicious! Bring your ownwine and enjoy it.

7. I think that one of mybiggest pet peeves is peoplewho can't drive/park. Justthis morning I had an inci-dent with a guy who appar-ently felt that he neededtwo meters in front of and

behind his small hatchbackin order to make sure thathe could safely exit his spotlater in the day. I wanted topark behind him, but didn'twant the back of my carblocking a driveway, so Ineeded him to move up abit. Spots are at a premiumdowntown; it seems to methat as a matter of commoncourtesy one should park asclose as possible to the carin front of them in order toallow the maximum numberof cars to have spots. Now,normally it is difficult to tellwhich car is the offenderbecause it's impossible toknow who got there first,but this time I caught theculprit red handed! Luckilyhe was still sitting in his carwaiting for 9h30 so I wasable to engage him. Aftermuch discussion he reluc-tantly agreed to move for-ward; he did so with adegree of caution indicativeof a man having no appreci-ation of the size of his caror perception of his sur-roundings. I see stuff likethis all the time and it reallyirks me. Any of you whohave tried to park aroundschool on any morningshould understand whereI'm coming from.

8. I think that Friday NightLights is a great show. Per-haps even the best show onTV right now. How can ashow about high schoolfootball be the best show onTV? Watch it and see foryourself. It's perhaps not ascompelling as 24, but it ishigh quality drama evenwithout explosions, terror-ists, torture, PDAs, dufflebags and a sweet tickingclock. It even gives me

30 Janvier 2007

7

goose bumps sometimes.And that's a good thing.

9. I think that these are myrandom NBA thoughts atthe midway point in theseason: a) The Suns (34-8) and theMavs (35-8, after a 0-4start) are totally out of con-trol. Both teams have hadmultiple double digit win-ning streaks and as I writethis the Suns are riding a 15gamer. However, if historyhas taught us anything it isthat the Sun will set sometime in early June. I thinkthe Mavs are for real though

and Mark Cuban is probablygoing to get the NBA titlethat he so deserves. b) The Lebron James hypesure has died down. He'sstill having a great season(27ppg, 7rpg, 6apg), but it'sdefinitely his quietest. c) My Lakers are a qualityteam and Kobe Bryant isstrong MVP candidate. Allthose who say that he does-n't make his teammatesbetter need to consider thefact that a team giving sub-stantial minutes to LukeWalton, Brian Cook, JordanFarmar, Andrew Bynum,Smush Parker, Maurice

Evans etc. is among theupper echelon of teams inthe loaded Western Confer-ence. d) On that note, the smallpower shift that seemed tohave been occurring a fewyears ago which held thepotential to create a balanceof power between the Westand East has clearly beenhalted. The balance hasswung so far back to theWestern Conference that itis embarrassing.

10. I think that Al Goreneeds to get his act to-gether and make up his

mind. In my last column Iwas talking about 10 degreetemperatures; by the time itwas actually published itwas about -33 degrees.Then a few days later itwent back up to zero, andtoday as I write it is around-20 degrees. So what's thedeal? If it is really true thathe invented the weatherand can control it (which,from what I understand,was the point of “An Incon-venient Truth”), why doesn'the dial up some warmertemperatures for us here inMontreal? �

Les aventures du Capitaine CorporateAmerica - Les angoisses nocturnes du Capitaine IIpar Laurence Bich-Carrière (Law III)

DON’T MISS IT!

Michèle Denis, Director of Student Programs(514) 397-3073 - mdenis@stikeman.com

www.stikeman.com

WHERE :DATE : January 30, 2007

TIME : 3:30 p.m.

QUID NOVI

8

9

January 30, 2007

A Reply to “When Turkey ShotFreedom” by Andrew Mason (Law III)

“Turkish-Armenian rela-tions should be takenout of a 1915 meters-

deep well.”

- Hrant Dink(http://www.armenews.com/article.php3?id_arti-cle=27696)

Vrouyr Makalian opted for apunchy headline but sunkhis argument. His article ig-nores the complexities in-herent in murderedjournalist Hrant Dink'sworld-view and blames awhole country and a culturefor the crime of an individ-ual (one might be forgivenfor thinking that the 'WongAffair' post-Dawson wouldhave warned the authoragainst laying blame on apeople rather than an indi-vidual). To put the headlinein perspective, how wouldone have reacted to a possi-ble 9/12 headline: “WhenMuslims flew planes intofreedom”? A handful of indi-viduals acted, the interna-tional Muslim communitymost assuredly did not. At-tempting to demonize acommunity for the actionsof the few must alwaysdraw appropriate censure.

First, to Dink and his actualview of Armenian-Turkishrelations. He consistentlyemployed the term geno-cide when referring to theterrible events of 1915. Toclear the elephant from theroom, let us talk briefly ofthis genocide. Dink's posi-tion is endorsed by govern-ments the world over -

Stephen Harper recently is-sued a special message tothe Armenian community onthe anniversary of the geno-cide. Past world-leaderswere also aware of theatrocities and of theirlegacy; Nuremburg Docu-ment L3/USA-28 contains aglib statement made byHitler to his subordinatesbefore the invasion ofPoland, “Who, after all,speaks today of the annihi-lation of the Armenians?” (Itshould be noted that thisdocument was never en-tered into evidence and itsprovenance is controversial:see the transcript of the trialon the Nizkor Project web-site,http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/imt/tgmwc/tgmwc-14/tgmwc-14-132-01.shtml,for the comments of Prose-cutor Dodds on the sub-ject). Hitler's ramblingsaside, the internationalcommunity agrees that theevidence suggests therehad been genocide. Dinkwas not afraid to advancethis position.

Dink was also adamant thatthe issue was not black orwhite and he disagreed ve-hemently with France's newlaw that illegalizes all refu-tation of the Armeniangenocide. His highly publi-cized sentencing at trial inTurkey was, he claimed, theresult of a misunderstandingabout how he was employ-ing the folk-phrase “replacethe poisoned blood associ-ated with the Turk, withfresh blood associated withArmenia”: his ultimate goalhad actually been to en-

courage the Armenian Dias-pora to be reconciled withthe past and for Turkish Ar-menians to integrate withinsociety. This position did notendear Dink to Armeniannationalists at home andabroad. It is a shame that,now that Dink can no longerclarify his position, his mes-sage and his death arebeing used in the course ofthe ongoing vendetta be-tween Armenian and Turkishnationalists.

Now, on to Malakian's con-demnation of Turkish soci-ety. There are severalfissures in Turkish society(as there are in all soci-eties): those between ethnicgroups (Armenian, Turk,Kurd and others), politicalfriction between left andright, and finally the titanicstruggle between secularnationalists and Islamic fun-damentalists. Since the daysof Attaturk, the army hasacted as the defender ofsecular society, going so faras to interfere in the com-position of governments,such as requesting (and ob-taining) the resignation ofpoliticians deemed a threatto secularism. In the wakeof the Iraq invasion, manyobservers (especially thosefrom the Middle East), in-cluding a Prof at this faculty,were initially favourable toAmerican action but nowfeel that the ensuing chaosand anarchy reinforces theadage 'the devil you know'.The current situation inTurkey may be comparable.There are limits on freedomand democratic action,there may be censorship of

certain forms of speech -but the alternative to thecurrent nexus of intereststhat prop up Turkey's secu-lar government appearsmuch worse: the establish-ment of an Islamic Republicthat could potentially be farmore oppressive (particu-larly to religious minoritieslike the Armenian commu-nity) and the potential lossof a long-time NATO ally forthe West. All this is not tosay that we should turn ablind eye to abuses ofpower but rather that onemust approach Turkish soci-ety and government with aneye to Turkish history andpolitical and religious under-currents. One should cer-tainly not use Turkey'sunique domestic situation asan excuse to blame a soci-ety for the actions of an as-sassin. More importantly, itseems very unlikely thatDink would wish us to doso. �

10

Quid Novi

Thursday, Feb. 1st at 11:30amMoot Court, New Chancellor Day Hall

3644 Peel St. – Faculty of Law

McGill International Journal of Sustainable Development Law and Policy & Environmental Law McGill

present:

Climate Change – Too little, too lateAn assessment of Canada’s response

A Lecture by Johanne GélinasCommissioner of the Environment and

Sustainable Development

JANUARY 30, 2007

11

Rien à direpar Marguerite Tinawi (Law II)

Chers condisciples duDroit,

J’avais pris la résolution endébut d’année d’écrire plussouvent au Quid et la se-maine dernière, je n’aimême pas été foutue devous pondre trois lignes.Pas fort, j’en conviens. Maisavant que vous ne m’at-tribuiez à tout jamais l’éti-quette dePrometteuse-dans-le-Vent(ce qui, à vrai dire, n’iraitpas si mal avec mon profilde Future-Avocate-Véreuse), donnez-moi aumoins la chance de m’expli-quer, de vous convaincre demon innocence. Ou pouremployer du vocabulaire àla mode ces temps-ci, lais-sez-moi plaider mon proprecas, faire un « moot dontvous êtes le héros ». Enfin,dans mon cas, il s’agiraitplutôt d’un moot dont jesuis l’héroïne, mais pas-sons…

Alors, gang de Seigneuries,vous êtes prêts ? Écoutezbien ça…

LES FAITS :

[1] Dans le Quid Novi du 16janvier 2007, l’appelante (ci-après « MOI ») a publié unarticle intitulé « Souhaits etrésolutions pour 2007 ».Ledit article se concluait par

les mots suivants : « Ma ré-solution pour l’année 2007 ?Écrire plus souvent au QUID». Or MOI n’a rien publiédans le Quid de la semainequi a suivi.

[2] Outrés, les lecteurs duQuid ont intenté un recourscollectif contre MOI afin : a)d’obtenir une injonctionobligeant MOI à publier unarticle dans le Quid chaquesemaine ; b) de faire dé-clarer MOI comme une «Prometteuse-dans-le-Vent »; c) d’exiger des dom-mages-intérêts sous formede bière gratuite à chaqueCoffee House, et ce, jusqu’àla fin de l’année 2007.

[3] Les savantes juges depremière instance, à savoirMmes les juges Briand etGorys, ont accueilli le re-cours collectif des intimésdans sa totalité.

LA QUESTION EN LITIGE:

[4] MOI a-t-elle manqué àsa résolution du 16 janvieren ne publiant rien dans leQuid du 23 janvier?

L’ARGUMENTATION :

[5] Écoutez les Seigneurs,c’est pas compliqué : MOIest complètement inno-cente. Elle a rien fait ! C’estvrai ! Alors allez pas l’ac-

cuser des pires atrocités!(Point first writing qu’ils dis-ent dans le guide de rédac-tion)

[6] Et si vous n’êtes pas to-talement convaincus parmon merveilleux premier ar-gument, pensez à ça : pren-dre la résolution d’écrireplus souvent, ça ne veutpas dire prendre la résolu-tion d’écrire à chaque se-maine. (Trop subtile lanuance…) D’ailleurs ça veutdire quoi « plus souvent » ?Écrire plus souvent que lasession dernière ? Écrire leplus souvent possible ? En-voyer un article intitulé «plus souvent » au Quid ?C’est tellement pas clair quela résolution devrait êtrefrappée de nullité absolue(1407 CCQ).

[7] A part de t’ça, la se-maine dernière, y’avait rienà écrire! Alors par souci en-vironnemental, MOI a dé-cidé de ne pas allonger leQuid inutilement, et cefaisant, elle a sauvé 4 ar-bres de la forêt boréale. VosSeigneuries, en Équité, tantde dévouement planétaire,ça pleure pour un soulage-ment immédiat!!!

[8] Enfin, les juges de pre-mière instance étaient to-talement biaisées etpartiales. Ben oui ! En tantqu’Editors in Chief du Quid,

elles avaient tout intérêt àaccueillir les demandes desintimés. Un article de plus,ça augmente dramatique-ment les ventes du Quid.Alors imaginez l’aubainelorsque l’article est assuréchaque semaine…

L’ORDONNANCE DE-MANDÉE :

[8] MOI demande à ce que: a) sa résolution du 16 jan-vier soit annulée pour im-précision flagrante; b)l’Ordre de la libération duQuid lui soit décerné; c) desdommages-intérêts luisoient octroyés pour so-latium doloris sous forme dechampagne gratuit (DomPérignon) à chaque CoffeeHouse, et ce, jusqu’à la findes temps.

LISTES DES AUTORITÉS:

L’Autorité héraldique duCanadaL’Autorité parentaleL’Autorité des griefs desForces canadiennesL’Autorité palestinienneL’Autorité financière desPremières nationsL’Autorité d'inscription locale

Et j’en passe…

Na!�

Vous n’avez rien à dire non plus?

Écrivez au Quid!

Heure de tombée: Jeudi 17h00

Quid Novi

Les aventures du Capitaine CorporateAmerica - A la Saint-Crépin!par Laurence Bich-Carriière (Law III)

CAREER DEVELOPMENT OFFICE TOWN HALL

WEDNESDAY JANUARY 31ST - 4:30 PM MOOT COURT

The CDO Advisory Board is asking for your opinions and suggestions regarding the financing of theCDO. This meeting is a great opportunity to assess what services of the CDO are important to stu-dents and where the resources of the CDO should be spent. A short presentation on the principal is-sues will be followed by a period of question and discussion. Let us know what you think and share

any creative solutions you might have!

A referendum on increasing student fees for the CDO will also take place around the middle of Feb-ruary.

Nous vous invitons à envoyer vos questions, commentaires et suggestions par courriel aux étudi-ants siégeant au Comité consultatif du CDO, aux adresses suivantes:

stephanie.bachand@mail.mcgill.ca et jarom.britton@mail.mcgill.ca. Les questions reçues à l’avanceseront adressées lors du town hall, en plus des questions posées lors de la rencontre.

12