I was in the middle of writing an article deploring the use of “judicial notice” in child vaccination cases when – boom! – the game-changing decision of Justice Alex Pazaratz in the case JN v. CG came out. Until then, I had not been able to discover a single case where a dispute over whether or not to vaccinate children for COVID-19 had been decided in favour of the parent who didn’t want to vaccinate.

Instead, I discovered long strings of cases in several provinces where judges had simply followed one another like sheep, taking judicial notice of things that their predecessors had taken judicial notice of, and never genuinely applying their minds to the question of whether that practice might have flaws. The result was invariably to rule in favour of the parent who parroted the public health authorities.


Karen Selick is a Columnist for the Western Standard and based near Belleville, Ontario. She been a columnist for the National Post, Canadian Lawyer Magazine, and the original Western Standard. She retired in 2016 after 38 years of practicing law.

Recommended for you

(0) comments

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.