Many legal experts describe online gambling in Canada as a grey area. That means there are no clear laws about it, which explains why some people think it’s legal and others believe it’s banned.

Does that mean the police could one day come after your laptop for playing a few rounds of poker online? It’s unlikely. In fact, the Canadian Revenue Agency might never come after you too whether you win $100 on roulette or $1 million on slots. Continue reading to find more information below.

Gambling is a Provincial Matter
Gambling is a provincial issue according to country laws. There’s no grayness around it. From Alberta to BC, Manitoba to Quebec, each jurisdiction decides whether to permit gambling businesses.

So far, nearly every province allows one or more forms of online gambling. British Columbia first legalized online lotto games and sports betting in 2004. In 2009, it permitted online poker and casino games like slots and blackjack in 2010.

Quebec, Alberta, Manitoba and Ontario have similar gambling laws. In the Maritime province of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Prince Edwards Island, online gambling falls under the jurisdiction of the Atlantic Lottery Corp. It permits lotto games but restricts slots and card games.

To be clear, many provincial gambling sites accept bets from local residents only. Manitoba lottery apps serve players in Manitoba and Alberta poker websites open account for people in Alberta alone.

Offshore Casinos are the Grey Area
Although Canadian laws dictate provinces are responsible for regulating gambling, they don’t talk about offshore casinos. They don’t state whether it’s legal for Canadians to accept bets at foreign betting sites. And they don’t mention whether offshore operators can welcome Canucks.

According to Michael Lipton, a gaming law expert, Canadian players commit no crimes when they bet at offshore casinos. As such, you can find legal sites for online gambling in Canada. And you can bet on slots, blackjack or poker and you’ll be safe.

That said, online casinos based overseas can’t set up their offices on Canadian soil. Starnet Communications International, an operator based in Antigua, once opened an office in Vancouver with an attempt to operate in Canada.

 Unfortunately, the B.C. Supreme Court determined Starnet couldn’t operate in Canada and it ceased its operations in 2001. For clarity, some online casinos host their servers in the country, mainly at the Kahnawake Gaming Commission offices in Quebec. But they’re licensed elsewhere.

Online Gaming Profits are Untaxed
Because the Federal Government has not laws about online gambling, the Revenue Agency doesn’t tax iGaming profits. People have been playing online casinos for over a decade. And the Revenue Agency has never gone after anyone’s money.

The most publicized online casino win was a $7.5 million jackpot winner in 2015. It was the largest payout a Canadian has won through gambling. Naturally, the news spread tremendously throughout the county. But the winner, who chose to remain anonymous, was never taxed.

A handful of more Canucks have won $100,000 to $11 million since 2015. And barring for professional gamblers, no one has had to pay taxes on their profits. In case you’re wondering, Americans must pay taxes on their online casino profits, sometimes as much as 30%.

A Wide Range of Games Allowed
Although providences restrict some games, offshore casinos do not. They let Canadians gamble on just about anything: slots, bingo, video poker, blackjack, scratch cards, poker and baccarat. What’s more, they provide a large collection of variants.

That way, you don’t just find a handful of slots online. There are hundreds of them from classic games to jackpots, Megaways to VR slots. Likewise, you can play Texas Hold’em, Hi-Lo, Omaha, 7-Card or Caribbean poker.

Another benefit of Canadian online casinos is that they provide games from many software providers. This ensures you can evaluate the features in games offered by several developers to choose the best-quality slots or card games.

Still on games, you can play slots, poker and blackjack on your mobile devices. No longer are you limited to your workstation. Instead, you can pull out your iPhone while on the subway, beach or sofa and play a variety of games.

Sports Betting Sites a Click Away
Like online casinos, sports betting websites are always a click away. The best sportsbooks are based in the UK and Malta, licensed, safe and regulated. They provide betting markets for Canadian sports leagues, American, European and world sports.

What’s more, they provide the latest betting features to Canadians: in-play, mobile, and partial withdrawal services. On the other hand, offshore casinos allow Canucks to bet and withdraw their profits without paying taxes.

So, why don’t sportsbooks sponsor Canadian sports leagues? It is all about the laws. Sure, you can bet at a sportsbook based in London. But it has no license to operate in Ontario or Saskatchewan and therefore can’t support local leagues.

 Bonuses Lure Canadians
In Some countries, online casinos are allowed to operate without handing out bonuses, at least not large amounts. Luckily, Canadians aren’t restricted by such measures. They are welcomed with generous amounts of betting money, up to $1000 at the best casinos.

This money can be used to play a full range of games and win real money. But in many cases, there are some restrictions that guide players on how to use promotional cash. For example, there’s a betting limit, games you can’t play and the maximum you can win.

Problem Gambling Protection
One of the disadvantages of not having clear gambling laws is that it leaves some players vulnerable. In the UK, players can contact the Gambling Commission if they feel like an operator exploited them due to their addiction.

In Canada, players only hope casinos will act responsibly. Fortunately, the best casinos in Canada must protect all players by law. They must have tools to detect addicted players and stop them. Or they can let players self-examine and limit their budgets if they have to. All the same, many online casinos have a responsibility to help players play responsibly.

BY NANA ANJEI-POKU

In continued efforts to provide information to the public regarding the Courts of Ontario, the following are the most recent updates.

Limitation Periods
Limitation Periods under the Re-opening Ontario (A Flexible Response to COVID-19) Act, 2020 will end, and suspended time periods will resume running as of September 14^th, 2020.  For example, if you had a deadline to file a claim in Small Claims Court on April 16^th, 2020, which is thirty days after the original limitation suspension date back on March 16^th, 2020, you will have to now file it by October 14^th, 2020, which is thirty days from the date the limitation period was lifted. This will apply to all deadlines attributable to all courts and tribunals in Ontario.

Provincial Offences Court
Limitation periods under the Provincial Offences Act will be lifted on September 11^th, 2020. Beginning September 28^th, 2020, Provincial Offences Act will be expanded to include non-trial matters remotely. These matters will include guilty pleas, withdrawals, judgment delivery, first appearances and adjournments.  No in-person Provincial Offences Act proceedings will be conducted until at least Monday, October 19^th, 2020.  As previously mentioned, all matters scheduled between March 16^th, and October 16^th, are still being adjourned and rescheduled. Information concerning POA appeals will be updated at a later date.

Small Claims Court Proceedings
Small Claims Court matters continue in the same manner as the previous update with motions, and urgent garnishment hearings being heard via telephone or videoconference.  Settlement conferences continue to be held remotely with the consent of both parties.

Criminal Court Proceedings
Starting September 8^th, 2020, virtual criminal case management courts will be starting in: Barrie, Brantford, Brockville, Chatham, Cornwall, Lindsay, London, Milton, Niagara (St. Catharines/Welland/Fort Erie), North Bay, Parry Sound, Perth, Peterborough, Sarnia, Sault Ste Marie, Sudbury, Toronto North (1000 Finch) and Toronto West (2201 Finch). If you have any criminal matters, please contact the courthouse directly for information specific to your matter.

BY NANA ADJIE-POKU

Back in 2017, there was an article written in the Globe & Mail involving lawyer Hadiya Roderique and the micro aggressions she was facing while working as an employment lawyer at the law firm Faskens. This was a job she landed right out of law school. In the article, she spoke about struggling to fit into the “Upper-class white world” and that “Big law firms could not accommodate the person and colour she was.” Needless to say, this article made some noise in the big law firms.  What Ms. Roderique wrote about; many were speaking about in their private conversations.

When you speak with some of the black lawyers, many will tell you that they have been mistaken for assistants as opposed to lawyers. Many have not been included in workplace events compared to their white counterparts.

A lot of these firms speak about diversity and inclusion, yet research shows otherwise.  In 2016, 19.3% of the province’s lawyers identified as being racialized.

For this most recent analysis, Globe and Mail corresponded with twenty law firms.  Some of these firms were: Blakes, Davies, Goodmans, McCarthy Tetrault, Oslers, Stikeman and Torys. When queried about the percentages of black or racialized lawyers, some firms would not provide the percentage due to, as they put it, privacy concerns. Five of the firms did provide data on black lawyers including the number of black partners.  The other top firms advised that they did not collect the info or did not want to share it publicly.

Of the findings, black lawyers who were partners represented approximately 35 out of 4,000 partners. Firms McCarthy Tetrault, Fasken, Goodmans, Dentons and Aird & Berlis reported that 2% of their 700 lawyers were black. This percent also included articling students and partners. Some of the black lawyers who were approached asked to remain anonymous due to fear that any opinions or comments would impact their careers. Of the twenty firms mentioned the following five firms had the highest percentage of partners who racialized.

• Miller Thomson – 23.6%
• Gowlings – 19%
• Dentons-17% includes articling students
• Torys – 16%
• McCarthy Tetrault – 13%

31% of black lawyers have been found to work as sole practitioners as opposed to being found inside the big firms, while you find that 19% of their white counterparts were doing the same. The reason for such a high percentage may be due to the fact that many were unable to land careers in the big Bay Street firms.

Now when it comes to schooling, black students were more represented at York University’s Osgoode Hall at a rate of 8%, other visible minorities were at a rate of 35% compared to 49% white students.  At University of Toronto and Queens University the rate is: 1% black, 42% other visible minority and 53% white. One explanation for this may be the fact that many black/racialized students are coming from low income households where law school is way out of their range of affordability.

The hiring process was noted to be a difficult one for blacks. If your name came across as being black or racialized, you had less of a chance of receiving a call for an interview. This could be a process next to none. Research was done in 2016 and revealed that students who “whitened” their name had a 2.5% more chance at receiving a call back for an interview.

Another area of concern is the rate of pay black lawyers receive.  A white lawyer makes an average of $12,000 more than blacks, indigenous and LGBTQ lawyers.

Black female lawyers have it worse due to their race and gender. Current President of the Canadian Bar Association Vivene Salmon recalled one incident where she attended a meeting with a group all white male lawyers and was asked to serve coffee. She stated that that this shows blacks are not considered equal.

Now with the recent George Floyd incident, some of the Bay Street firms have been revisiting the whole diversity and inclusion area and have made public statements on their plans to hire more lawyers from diverse backgrounds. Some of these firms have acknowledged the fact that they haven’t done well in terms of the retention of lawyers from racialized backgrounds.

I mean, this is a start, although it should have been recognized years ago back when the original Globe & Mail article was released, or even way before that. Most recently, firms Norton Rose, Stikeman Elliott and Bennett Jones have made a pledge to improve the representation of blacks in their boardrooms. Some of them include, but not limited to, hiring at least 5% students and employing black or visible minorities in 3.5% of senior roles by 2025.

Some suggestions by Ms. Roderique were to: eliminate the mystery of the interview process, make recruiting and retention more objective by removing names from resumes, and use standardized questioning in the process so that it is fair and doesn’t leave racialized prospects feeling less than equal.