Beneath the Law

Hosted by Stories and Strategies

News Commentary PoliticsInterviews guests

Website RSS feed

Episodes

Latest episode

Jul 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

July 21, 2026Episode 7230 min

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

Send us Fan MailWhat 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 UsGardiner Roberts website | Gavin email | Stephen email

July 7, 2026Episode 7129 min

The Legal Risks of Trusting Artificial Intelligence

Send us Fan MailWhat 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 UsGardiner Roberts website | Gavin email | Stephen email

June 23, 2026Episode 7027 min

Ahluwalia and the New Tort of Intimate Partner Violence

Send us Fan MailWhat 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 UsGardiner Roberts website | Gavin email | Stephen email

June 9, 2026Episode 6928 min

Google Got Summoned: Digital Privacy and Political Speech in Canada

Send us Fan MailWhat 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 UsGardiner Roberts website | Gavin email | Stephen email

May 26, 2026Episode 6836 min

When Judges Become Social Engineers

Send us Fan MailWhen 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 UsGardiner 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 MailThe 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 Defence23:28 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 UsGardiner Roberts website | Gavin email | Stephen email

May 5, 2026Episode 6630 min

Lied on Resume but Sued for Wrongful Dismissal Anyway

Send us Fan MailOne 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 UsGardiner Roberts website | Gavin email | Stephen email

March 31, 2026Episode 6522 min

Absolute Privilege or Absolute Overreach: The Sex Tape That Broke Litigation Immunity

Send us Fan MailA hidden camera, a secret recording, and a courtroom showdown. Stephen Thiele and Gavin Tighe unpack a shocking case where a surreptitious sex tape made its way into a family law proceeding, raising serious legal and ethical questions. What begins as an acrimonious separation quickly escalates into a debate about privacy, voyeurism, and the limits of legal protection under the doctrine of absolute privilege. They explore whether lawyers can be held accountable for distributing deeply personal and arguably irrelevant material in court, and how the justice system balances open litigation with protecting individuals from harm. With sharp insights and candid commentary, this “spicy” episode dives into the intersection of family law, professional conduct, and privacy rights, leaving listeners questioning where legal immunity should end.Listen For:1:47 What is the doctrine of absolute privilege and how does it protect conduct in legal proceedings?7:36 Why did the first instance judge refuse to strike the claim against the lawyers?10:36 What makes this case so remarkable in terms of how the lawyers handled the evidence?16:52 Can opposing lawyers ever owe a duty of care to the other side in a lawsuit?19:48 Should personal cost awards against lawyers be the remedy when advocacy crosses the ethical line? Leave a rating/review for this podcast with one click Contact UsGardiner Roberts website | Gavin email | Stephen email

March 17, 2026Episode 6427 min

The Tumbler Ridge Tragedy: Is AI Above the Law?

Send us Fan MailWhat happens when a technology designed to serve humanity becomes complicit in its destruction? This episode confronts one of the most unsettling legal frontiers of our time: the intersection of artificial intelligence, tort liability, and the duty to warn. Gavin Tighe and Stephen Thiele examine the horrific mass shooting in Tumbler Ridge, British Columbia where a shooter who had repeatedly told ChatGPT of their violent intentions killed eight people, including five children, and ask whether the company bears legal responsibility for its silence. Drawing on foundational principles of Canadian law, including reasonably foreseeable harm and duty of care, Gavin and Stephen explore whether AI platforms must be held to the same standards as the human professionals they increasingly seek to replace. From unauthorized practice of law to the collapse of solicitor-client privilege, this episode is essential listening for anyone navigating the brave new legal world of artificial intelligence.Listen For:3:30 What duty of care did ChatGPT owe the victims of the Tumbler Ridge shooting?5:39 How does AI's role as a virtual therapist create professional legal obligations?9:09 Why does basic tort law apply when a company has knowledge of foreseeable harm?11:22 What does the Westray Mines case reveal about corporate liability for inaction?17:04 How does using ChatGPT destroy solicitor-client privilege in Canadian litigation? Leave a rating/review for this podcast with one clickContact UsGardiner Roberts website | Gavin email | Stephen email

March 3, 2026Episode 6332 min

Can Government Declare an Emergency to Silence Dissent?

Send us Fan MailWhat happens when a government turns its most powerful emergency legislation against its own citizens for honking horns? This episode examines one of the most consequential constitutional rulings in recent Canadian legal history: the Federal Court of Appeal's decision finding that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's invocation of the Emergencies Act against the 2022 Freedom Convoy protest was unlawful. Gavin Tighe and Stephen Thiele dissect the court's rigorous analysis of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, specifically the Section 2 protections for political speech and Section 8 protections against unreasonable search and seizure, and ask the harder question: when government wields extraordinary power and achieves its objectives, does a court ruling after the fact actually matter? Listen For:2:17 What qualifies as a true national emergency in Canada?5:43 Why was the Emergencies Act invoked during the Freedom Convoy protests?9:31 Why did the Federal Court rule the Emergencies Act was used improperly?17:31 Can the government freeze your bank account for supporting a protest?22:46 Should extreme government powers ever be used to stop civil disobedience? Leave a rating/review for this podcast with one clickContact UsGardiner 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