Publications
Citizenship revocation, misrepresentation and international atrocity: Sosa Orantes expands current jurisprudence
The 2026 Federal Court decision in Minister of Citizenship and Immigration v Sosa Orantes represents one of the most significant modern applications of Canada’s citizenship-revocation framework to allegations of international atrocity crimes. This article situates Sosa within the broader landscape of Canadian revocation jurisprudence, particularly the post-war cases involving concealed Nazi affiliations. It argues that Sosa marks an evolution in how courts handle evidentiary complexity, assess international human-rights conduct in civil proceedings and reconcile the integrity of citizenship with principles of fairness. By comparing Sosa to Oberlander, Katriuk and related cases, this article demonstrates how the decision reinforces that Canadian citizenship is not immune from revocation when procured through the concealment of crimes against humanity.
Released on Apr 15, 2026
From the Editors: Litigation Committee newsletter – Spring 2026
Welcome to the Spring 2026 edition of the IBA Litigation Committee Newsletter, entitled: ‘The future of evidence: cross-border evidence gathering and discovery, AI-based evidence review, digital traces and procedural fairness’.
Released on Apr 14, 2026
The new IBA EU Judicial Cooperation Subcommittee – first year in review and plans ahead
The IBA Litigation Committee's EU Judicial Cooperation Subcommittee, established in 2025, aims to promote the resolution of cross-border disputes within the European Union. Our main focus is on facilitating the exchange of ideas on legal and practical issues that arise when litigating in an EU-wide context. The subcommittee thus covers a range of topics, including jurisdictional issues, service of documents, taking of evidence, and enforcement of judgments, to name but a few.
Released on Apr 14, 2026
Procedural fairness and asymmetry in access to evidence in South Africa
Across the world, advances in technology have streamlined the collection and storage of evidence, having an effect on the legal process overall. With the rising complexity of these technologies, we see the deepening of the divide between those in South Africa who have true access to justice and those who have a stunted version. These advancements have resulted in procedures in law that previously did not exist, leaving those disadvantaged in a precarious situation of being unable to use these technologies or relying on an overburdened and under-resourced attorney. This article will examine how technological development may affect procedural fairness and offer recommendations to avoid unfairness.
Released on Apr 14, 2026