Tag Archives: Legal Word of the Day

Paralegal Karen Fair

Legal Word of the Day: “Nunc Pro Tunc”

Nunc Pro Tunc – This Latin term literally translates to “now for then.” Nunc pro tunc refers to a court-ordered retroactive effect. Nunc pro tunc gives jurisdiction to take an action that was not taken when it should have been. A nunc pro tunc order is applied as though the action had been performed at […]

Legal Word of the Day: “Litigation Privilege”

“Litigation Privilege” — A rule of evidence, litigation privilege protects certain documents from disclosure to an opposing party. Litigation privilege includes not just lawyer-client communications but third-party communications as well as preparation for litigation. Whether a communication is protected by litigation privilege is a question of fact. It is determined in the specific context in […]

Legal Word of the Day: “Jurisdiction”

“Jurisdiction” – Specific right, power or authority given to an adjudicator, to decide a legal matter.   Jurisdiction is an integral part of the justice system. If an adjudicator makes a decision outside the jurisdiction for the matter, that “jurisdictional deficit” means the decision is subject to appeal or review. There are limits to adjudicative […]

Legal Word of the Day: “Reasonable Apprehension of Bias”

“Reasonable Apprehension of Bias” — A reasonable apprehension of bias is the standard by which a judge or decision maker can be removed. Bias is a predisposition to rule in favour of one side to the detriment of the other. The bias can be real or perceived. Justice de Grandpré explained the test for reasonable […]

Legal Word of the Day: “And / Or”

“And / Or” — Appears between two or more persons, statements or things in a list. It can be read either conjunctively (connected) or disjunctively (separating). For example, “A and/or B” can be read as “A and B” or “A or B.” Robert Dick, in his book Legal Drafting in Plain Language, states that term […]

Legal Word of the Day: “Sophistry”

“Sophistry” – A specious, hair-splitting argument, short on logic, which fails for lack of legal foundation. Sophistry is related to “cavil,” as a legal argument that fails for lack of foundation. Cases that describe or illustrate sophistry include: R. v. Wood, 1995 CanLII 7424 (ON SC) — 1995-04-25. In Wood, a professional engineer argued his […]

%d bloggers like this: