Beneath the Law

Hosted by Stories and Strategies

News Commentary PoliticsInterviews guests

Website RSS feed

Episodes

Latest episode

Aug 2026

Language

EN-US

About the show

If “No One is Above the Law,” then everyone is beneath it. Beneath the Law is a frank discussion between two lawyers who have lived and breathed the legal system in Canada for over 30 years. Winner of a 2026 Mondaq Thought Leadership Award, this podcast hosts Stephen Thiele and Gavin Tighe of Gardiner Roberts, examine the arguments made in some highly contentious, and public cases, with a focus on the intersection between law and politics and where courtrooms become part of the political arena. In each episode Beneath the Law digs into interesting and current legal topics or legal battles and provides insight and commentary on the law and its application in our society. Law is at its core the expression of the fundamental framework of any organized society – it is the fine print of the social contract. Courts play a fundamental role in any democracy, getting underneath the surface and beneath the law requires an understanding of not only what courts are doing but why.

Listen to episodes

60 recent

September 1, 2026Episode 7526 min

Safety vs. Privacy: Inside the TTC Random Drug Testing Ruling

Send us Fan Mail When does protecting the public justify reaching into an employee's private life? This episode takes on one of the most contentious labour and privacy law battles in recent Toronto history: the Toronto Transit Commission's random drug testing policy and the sweeping arbitration decision that struck it down . Hosts Gavin Tighe and Stephen Thiele unpack a case nearly two decades in the making, stretching from a fatal tunnel accident in 2007 to a 400-page arbitrator's ruling that found the TTC's policy violated employees' Charter rights against unreasonable search and seizure under Section 8. Drawing on Canadian law, conflicting arbitration precedents, and the hard logic of deterrence, Gavin and Stephen ask the question that cuts to the heart of workplace safety in Canada: if random testing was working, how do we prove it? Listen For: 3:18 How did a 2007 tunnel accident set off nearly 20 years of legal proceedings at the TTC? 9:16 Why did the arbitrator find the TTC's own evidence wasn't enough to justify random testing? 12:07 How did flawed cannabis testing science become a fatal problem for the TTC's case? 15:45 Why does Gavin argue employers should have more testing authority than roadside police checks, not less? 19:45 Is the absence of TTC accidents proof the policy was working or just good luck? Leave a rating/review for this podcast with one click Contact Us Gardiner Roberts website | Gavin email | Stephen email

August 18, 2026Episode 7427 min

Five Days, One Cat, and the Cost of Canadian Justice

Send us Fan Mail When a family breaks down, who gets the cat? That deceptively simple question drove four to five days of Superior Court litigation in Ontario…all funded by Canadian taxpayers, in what hosts Gavin Tighe and Stephen Thiele call one of the most revealing windows into the mounting crisis of judicial resource allocation in Canada. This episode dives into the Ontario family law case of Harold, a barn-cat-turned-courtroom-combatant whose ownership became the final flashpoint in a bitter divorce dispute. Gavin and Stephen unpack the legal framework courts apply when determining pet ownership — including the doctrines of abandonment, possessory title, and the evidentiary weight of care and custody — while raising pointed questions about whether publicly funded courts should be adjudicating disputes over personal property of nominal monetary value. The episode is as much a meditation on access to justice and court reform as it is a case analysis. Listen For: 6:00 How does Canadian law determine ownership of a family pet? 11:30 Why did the mother's temporary relinquishment of Harold not amount to abandonment? 13:30 What evidence did the court rely on to establish who owned the cat? 16:00 Should courts have the power to redirect low-value disputes to binding arbitration? 22:00 How can pet prenuptial agreements prevent costly litigation at family breakdown? Leave a rating/review for this podcast with one click Contact Us Gardiner Roberts website | Gavin email | Stephen email

August 4, 2026Episode 7329 min

Can a Lawyer Blame AI? Inside Mazaheri v Law Society of Ontario

Send us Fan Mail What happens when the legal profession's newest tool collides with its oldest duty…the duty not to mislead? Gavin Tighe and Stephen Thiele dissect Mazaheri v Law Society of Ontario, 2026 ONLSTH 112, the first case in which "hallucinated" AI-generated authorities were placed before the Law Society Tribunal. A suspended Ontario lawyer, fighting to regain his licence amid mortgage fraud allegations, filed motion materials drafted by generative AI, complete with cases that don't exist, and was hit with a record $31,150 full indemnity costs award. This episode of the Canadian law podcast examines professional regulation, the reliability of AI legal research, and where negligence ends and dishonesty begins. Listeners will come away understanding why, in the Canadian legal system, responsibility for what goes before a tribunal can never be outsourced to a machine. Listen For: 5:19 How did hallucinated cases end up before the Law Society Tribunal? 7:02 How widespread is the misuse of AI in North American courts? 15:03 What does the decision explain about how large language models work? 16:50 Why did the Tribunal award full indemnity costs of $31,150? 21:30 When does negligent AI use become dishonesty before a tribunal? Leave a rating/review for this podcast with one click Contact Us Gardiner Roberts website | Gavin email | Stephen email

July 21, 2026Episode 7230 min

The Red Card Reversal: FIFA, Trump, and the Rule of Law

Send us Fan Mail What happens when the most powerful politician on earth picks up the phone to dispute a referee's call? Gavin Tighe and Stephen Thiele step away from Canadian courtrooms and onto the World Cup pitch, examining FIFA's controversial reversal of a red card suspension following a phone call from U.S. President Donald Trump to FIFA president Gianni Infantino. What begins as sports talk becomes sharp legal commentary on due process, transparency, and the rule of law… the same principles that underpin the Canadian legal system and every functional democracy. From FIFA's opaque Article 27 to Belgium's dismissed appeal and historical precedents dating back to 1962, Gavin and Stephen reveal why arbitrary decision-making erodes public trust, whether in a stadium or a courtroom. Listeners will come away understanding why process, not outcomes, is what earns respect for institutions. Listen For: 5:04 What did Gianni Infantino admit about Trump's phone call? 9:07 What precedent did Brazil's 1962 Garrincha red card set? 12:32 How did FIFA use Article 27 to suspend Balogun's suspension? 13:35 Why does FIFA's reversal reveal a lack of rule of law? 20:21 What would genuine due process for red card appeals require? Leave a rating/review for this podcast with one click Contact Us Gardiner Roberts website | Gavin email | Stephen email

July 7, 2026Episode 7129 min

The Legal Risks of Trusting Artificial Intelligence

Send us Fan Mail What happens when a machine built to predict the next plausible word starts drafting the arguments lawyers put before a judge? Gavin Tighe and Stephen Thiele dig into a landmark cautionary tale for the Canadian legal system: the UK High Court's rebuke of international firm Pinsent Masons in Cork & Anor v Smith , where a junior lawyer's 59-page AI chat produced a fabricated insolvency rule that made it all the way into a letter to the court. The hosts widen the lens to a Quebec arbitration annulled over hallucinated case law, and to Ontario's own certification requirements for lawyers using AI. It's an unvarnished look at professional regulation, supervision, and what "checking your work" still means in Canadian law when the shortcut sounds so convincing. Listen For: 5:12 What actually happened in the Pinsent Masons insolvency case? 9:56 How did the AI chat transcript reveal the junior lawyer's process? 18:19 Where does AI genuinely help versus create legal research risk? 21:38 What does Ontario now require lawyers to certify about AI use? 27:23 Why do law firms need a formal policy governing AI use? Leave a rating/review for this podcast with one click Contact Us Gardiner Roberts website | Gavin email | Stephen email

June 23, 2026Episode 7027 min

Ahluwalia and the New Tort of Intimate Partner Violence

Send us Fan Mail What happens when the law recognizes a form of abuse that leaves no visible bruises? Gavin Tighe and Stephen Thiele examine a landmark Supreme Court of Canada decision that officially recognizes intimate partner violence as a new tort. The discussion explores how coercive control, psychological domination, financial manipulation, and long-term patterns of abusive behaviour can now give rise to civil claims even when traditional torts like assault do not apply. Gavin and Stephen unpack the facts of the case, the legal test established by the Court, and the broader implications for family law, women's rights, cultural traditions, and the evolution of the common law. They also debate whether courts should create new causes of action, whether damages adequately reflect the seriousness of the harm, and how an already strained justice system will manage the likely increase in litigation. This episode offers a thorough look at how the law adapts to better understand and address modern forms of harm within intimate relationships. Listen For: 2:59 Can Someone Commit Intimate Partner Violence Without Ever Being Physically Violent? 6:58 How Does This New Tort Challenge Traditional Cultural and Family Roles? 13:14 Why Did Canada's Supreme Court Create a Brand New Tort? 15:00 What Must Someone Prove to Win an Intimate Partner Violence Lawsuit? 25:02 Will This Landmark Decision Create More Pressure on Canada's Courts? Leave a rating/review for this podcast with one click Contact Us Gardiner Roberts website | Gavin email | Stephen email

June 9, 2026Episode 6928 min

Google Got Summoned: Digital Privacy and Political Speech in Canada

Send us Fan Mail What happens when governments start chasing anonymous online critics? Gavin Tighe and Stephen Thiele dive into the controversial use of administrative subpoenas by the US Department of Homeland Security to identify anonymous social media users critical of the Trump administration. The discussion explores the tension between freedom of speech, anonymity, national security, and government overreach, while drawing parallels between American constitutional history and modern online discourse. From pseudonyms used during the American Revolution to today’s debates over surveillance, online threats, Norwich orders, and political polarization, the hosts unpack the legal and ethical questions surrounding free expression in the digital age. The episode also examines how social media companies like Google navigate their responsibilities between protecting privacy and cooperating with law enforcement, while warning about the dangers of turning internet platforms into tools of political surveillance. Listen For: 05:26 What exactly did the Department of Homeland Security demand from Google? 08:18 Why does the right to anonymous speech have deep constitutional roots? 21:25 How does a Norwich order differ from an administrative government summons? 24:29 When does using a government institution cross the line into political weaponization? 25:53 What responsibility do social media platforms have when harmful content appears online? Leave a rating/review for this podcast with one click Contact Us Gardiner Roberts website | Gavin email | Stephen email

May 26, 2026Episode 6836 min

When Judges Become Social Engineers

Send us Fan Mail When judges become social engineers, democracy starts to wobble. Gavin and Stephen examine the Waterloo homeless encampment decision as a major example of courts moving beyond traditional Charter review and into the realm of public policy design. What began as a dispute over a municipal bylaw and a public parking lot becomes, in their view, a much larger warning about judicially engineered social outcomes, the constitutionalization of housing policy, the weakening of elected municipal authority, and the possibility that governments may increasingly respond with tools like the notwithstanding clause. Listen For: 00:00 Is housing now a protected Charter right in Canada? 7:15 Why did Waterloo lose the ability to clear a homeless encampment? 13:11 Could this decision create new constitutional rights around housing and income? 19:27 Are courts replacing elected governments in homelessness policy? 30:41 Could the notwithstanding clause become the next battleground? Leave a rating/review for this podcast with one click Contact Us Gardiner Roberts website | Gavin email | Stephen email

May 19, 2026Episode 6730 min

The Fake Case Crisis: How AI is Shaking Trust in the Courts

Send us Fan Mail The robot wrote the brief, but the lawyer pays the price. AI can draft a legal brief in seconds, but it can also torch a lawyer’s reputation just as fast. Gavin and Stephen take on the legal profession’s uneasy embrace of generative AI and the very real fallout from fake cases, invented quotations, and AI-drafted arguments making their way into court filings. What starts as a conversation about efficiency quickly becomes a warning about ethics, reputation, and responsibility. AI may be the newest tool in the legal toolbox, but every citation, authority, and argument filed with the court still belongs to the lawyer whose name is on the document. Use it carelessly, and the consequences can be brutal: wasted court time, harmed clients, personal cost awards, and a credibility hit that may never fully go away. Listen For: 05:07 Why Are Courts Seeing So Many AI-Hallucinated Cases? 10:25 How Risky Are Fake Quotes from Real Cases? 17:00 Who Pays When Lawyers File Unchecked AI Briefs? 21:18 Why Judges Can’t be the Last Line of Defence 23:28 Can Fake AI Cases Undo an Entire Arbitral Award? 25:54 How Can Lawyers Use AI Without Abdicating Judgment? Leave a rating/review for this podcast with one click Contact Us Gardiner Roberts website | Gavin email | Stephen email

May 5, 2026Episode 6630 min

Lied on Resume but Sued for Wrongful Dismissal Anyway

Send us Fan Mail One fake MBA. One real lawsuit. One unforgettable lesson. In this episode Gavin and Stephen dig into the Alberta employment case Tutor v. Accurate Screen Limited , where a senior business-development employee allegedly misrepresented his academic credentials, was fired for cause, found another job within months, and still sued for wrongful dismissal. They unpack why honesty is central to the employment relationship, how courts analyze just-cause terminations, why résumé fraud can destroy trust from the start, and why suing after being caught may be the boldest move of all. Along the way, they connect the case to broader employment-law principles, the difficulty of proving cause, the power imbalance courts recognize between employers and employees, and the growing challenge of fake credentials in an AI-driven world. Listen For: 00:00 What happens when someone with a fake MBA sues for wrongful dismissal? 2:42 Why did this Alberta résumé-fraud case become so surprising? 7:16 Can lying about academic credentials justify termination for cause? 13:16 How do burdens of proof work in employment-law dismissal cases? 23:24 Does an employer have a duty to verify a candidate’s résumé? Leave a rating/review for this podcast with one click Contact Us Gardiner Roberts website | Gavin email | Stephen email

Is this your show?

Claim this listing to keep it up to date, reach guests who want to pitch you, and manage bookings with Guestify.

Claim this listing