Send us Fan Mail

A 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 Us

Gardiner Roberts website | Gavin email | Stephen email

Send a text

What 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 click

Contact Us

Gardiner Roberts website | Gavin email | Stephen email

Send a text

What 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 click

Contact Us

Gardiner Roberts website | Gavin email | Stephen email

Send a text

Is social media the new Big Tobacco or is it simply the price of living in a hyper connected world?

Gavin Tighe and Stephen Thiele dive into the mounting legal and societal backlash against social media giants like Meta, TikTok, and Snapchat, exploring whether these platforms are fueling a youth mental health crisis—and if governments and courts can do anything about it.

From Australia’s sweeping ban on social media for children under 16 to Canada’s proposed legislation and billion-dollar lawsuits launched by school boards, the hosts unpack the evolving legal strategies, including the bold attempt to stretch the tort of public nuisance to cover digital harm.

They question whether causation between social media and mental health struggles can truly be proven, compare the issue to tobacco litigation, and examine the added complexity of AI-driven algorithms and echo chambers.

As technology accelerates beyond the reach of traditional regulation, this episode asks the pressing question: Can real-world laws meaningfully govern a borderless digital world?

Listen For:

1:40 How Has Social Media Changed Childhood Compared to Previous Generations?
8:23 Is Social Media Driving a Mental Health Crisis Among Teens?
9:55 What Are Governments Doing to Ban or Regulate Social Media for Children?
14:29 Why Is the Toronto District School Board Suing Social Media Companies?
21:41 Can Social Media Be Legally Defined as Addictive Like Tobacco?

Leave a rating/review for this podcast with one click

Contact Us

Gardiner Roberts website | Gavin email | Stephen email

Send a text

Can a single oath determine who gets to practise law in Canada?

Gavin Tighe and Stephen Thiele unpack a fascinating Alberta Court of Appeal decision that struck down a mandatory oath of allegiance for lawyers as unconstitutional.

Through the case of Amarjeet Singh Dhariwal, a Canadian born Sikh lawyer who refused to swear allegiance to the Crown on religious grounds, the discussion explores how freedom of religion, the rule of law, and professional licensing collide.

They examine why sincerity of belief mattered, how the Law Society of Alberta failed to justify the oath under the Charter, and what this ruling means for lawyers, regulators, and professional bodies across the country.

Along the way, they raise deeper questions about tradition, citizenship, and whether symbolic rituals still have a place in modern legal practice.

Listen For

:01 Are religious convictions absolutely protected under the Canadian Charter?
2:32 Can a professional oath be unconstitutional?
5:30 Does being born in Canada change the obligation to swear allegiance?
9:43 How do courts assess sincerity of religious belief?
15:07 Why did Alberta lose the Charter challenge?

Leave a rating/review for this podcast with one click

Contact Us

Gardiner Roberts website | Gavin email | Stephen email

Send a text

Did Trump just rewrite the rules of international law by capturing Nicolás Maduro?

Gavin Tighe and Stephen Thiele unpack the shocking U.S. operation that saw the arrest of Venezuela’s controversial leader…without war, without permission, and without apology.

Was it a bold act of justice or a dangerous display of unchecked power?

Gavin and Stephen break down the legal, political, and historical implications of this high-stakes move, comparing it to past extractions like Noriega and Eichmann, while exploring the murky space between law and enforcement.

This conversation challenges everything you thought you knew about sovereign immunity, presidential power, and what it really means to be “above the law.”

Listen For

:12 Can a superpower legally seize a foreign head of state?
2:54 Does international law mean anything without enforcement?
6:13 Has the US done this before and does precedent justify it?
9:14 Can a president claim sovereign immunity after indictment?
26:34 Is American military power a dangerous precedent for the world?

Leave a rating/review for this podcast with one click

Contact Us

Gardiner Roberts website | Gavin email | Stephen email

Send a text

What happens when a hockey hit crosses the line from rough play to criminal assault?

Gavin Tighe and Stephen Thiele unpack the legal chaos surrounding violence in hockey, sparked by a shocking stick attack in a recent Ontario Hockey League (OHL) game.

The lawyers break down when on-ice actions like body checks, fights, or brutal slashes step outside the game’s rules…and into the courtroom.

From historical NHL assaults to civil lawsuits and even potential criminal charges, this episode dives deep into the intersection between sports, consent, and the law.

Whether you're a die-hard hockey fan or just intrigued by legal grey zones, this discussion will make you rethink what it really means to "play the game."

Listen For

5:44 Can a Hockey Stick Become a Criminal Weapon?

8:47 How Do Consent and Rules Impact Legal Liability?

11:34 Should Pro Athletes Be Exempt from Criminal Charges?

18:19 What Civil Lawsuits Can Arise from On-Ice Injuries?

Leave a rating/review for this podcast with one click

Contact Us

Gardiner Roberts website | Gavin email | Stephen email

Send a text

If becoming a lawyer no longer requires proving what you know, what does the profession really stand for?

Gavin Tighe and Stephen Thiele take on the Law Society of Ontario’s proposal to scrap bar exams in favor of a training course, arguing that removing substantive testing undermines both public protection and the meaning of being called to the bar.

Drawing on their own experiences in law school and practice, they explore how legal education has changed, why baseline legal knowledge is essential, and how lowering standards risks public confidence in the profession.

They discuss the concerns about competency, mentorship, AI misuse, and an increasingly saturated legal market, ultimately questioning whether a profession without rigorous gate-keeping can still claim legitimacy as a learned profession.

Listen For

:25 Should lawyers be licensed without proving substantive legal knowledge
5:41 Why is the Law Society of Ontario considering scrapping the bar exams
9:42 How does removing testing put the public at risk
14:10 Can lawyers rely on AI without strong foundational knowledge
21:01 What happens to a profession when no one is allowed to fail

Leave a rating/review for this podcast with one click

Contact Us

Gardiner Roberts website | Gavin email | Stephen email