Palpitations for citations
By: Lawrence Veregin (‘18)
It has been four years since the McGill Law Journal (MLJ) last decided that every Canadian in the legal profession must change how they do their citations, only to create headaches for lawyers who learned under different styles.
There are now more editions of the Canadian Guide to Uniform Legal Citation (McGill Guide) than there are The Fast and the Furious movies. However, just like The Fast and the Furious movies, the latest entry feels like nothing more than a money grab.
Each edition of the McGill Guide is a reflection of its time. Who could forget the launch of the 7th Edition, which became the first feminist citation style guide? It addressed the number one complaint amongst women: no more periods. [Editor’s note: In an article covering the 7th Edition, UV reported, “one professor even joked that the new McGill Guide must be pregnant.”] The 8th Edition boldly added one hundred more pages of citation rule goodness. What visionary changes does the 9th Edition bring that captures the legal zeitgeist in 2018?
The cover of the 9th Edition is a glorious scarlet, with seas of white to its north and south. In a circle of white, the outline of a red tree grows in the centre. The design is reminiscent of a Canadian flag. The look is sleek, minimalistic, and modern. Its predecessor is a waning gradient of crimson, with a ribbon seemingly modelled after cheap two karat gold. Its design completely clashes with the lawyer’s Rolex.
Flip the cover and the changes are also stark and obvious. What better way for the McGill Law Journal to start off their guide to uniform legal citation than with mistakes on the inside cover?
The third citation,
SkyDome Act (Bus Parking), SO 2002, c 8, Schedule K, s 2.
should be,
Skydome Act (Bus Parking), 2002, SO 2002, c 8, Schedule K, s 2.
as per s. 2.1.4 on page E-23, which clearly states that statutes with years in the title should include the year. Further, the first jurisprudence citation uses a hyphen between consecutive pinpoints rather than an en dash, contrary to s. 1.5 on page E-13.
Even better, there are citations that were incorrect in the 8th Edition that still have not been fixed. The example of the Civil Marriage Act, SC 2005, c 41 (E-27 in 8th Edition, E-23 in 9th Edition) should be Civil Marriage Act, SC 2005, c 33. Don’t worry, there are plenty of new errors to discover, like on page E-25 where the Holocaust Memorial Day Act and Child Welfare Act, 1972 both incorrectly omit the comma after the year (an error which was not there in the 8th Edition at E-31).
The marketing materials for the 9th Edition raved about improvements in the section on electronic sources and digital content. The whole three and a half pages on this topic (down from four and half in the 8th Edition) adds cutting edge digital content like PDF files (s. 6.19.1.1 on E-102).
However, the greatest improvement is that additional reporter citations are no longer necessary for cases with a neutral citation. Even better, it only took about a couple of decades since the introduction of neutral citations for this epiphany to occur.
The MLJ gives the term “uniform” a very broad and liberal construction. Uniform seems to mostly refer to the fact that this edition is uniform with the last: the text and examples are largely identical to the 8th Edition. The only noticeable change is that examples are presented in borderless grey boxes rather than black bordered white boxes.
That’s not the only interpretation the MLJ has given to “uniform”. Uniform apparently means a book’s volume number should be placed before publication information if the volumes are published under separate titles, but after if they are published under the same title (s. 6.4.2 on E-89). It also means that there should be six different possible abbreviations for Canadian jurisdictions, depending on the material (Appendix A-1 on A-5 to A-6).
For digital content, despite stating that the full URL should be used, some of the examples use the full URL and others just use the URL to the home page without explanation. Making a reader search a site for a specific page seems to go against the point of a citation, but that just speaks to how audacious this citation style guide truly is.
Further, the 8th Edition believed that placing the session before the legislature (e.g. “1st Sess, 38th Parl”) for bills, while putting the session after the legislature (e.g. “38th Parl, 1st Sess”) for parliamentary papers (like Hansard debates) was uniform.
The 9th Edition embraces an even more revolutionary concept of uniform: those Hansard debates now use with hyphenated numbers for the legislature and session (e.g. “38-1”) (s. 4.1 on E-59), while preserving the style and order of bills (s. 2.4 on E-28). Uniform now means to be both inconsistent in order and style.
Unfortunately, those hoping that this sequel would finally resolve all of the great citation debates will be disappointed. The McGill Guide remains a law journal-centric guide as opposed to one targeted at the practice of law.
Sources frequently cited in practice, such as transcripts of trials or examinations for discovery, affidavits, evidence, statements of claim/defence, are only briefly alluded to in the 9th Edition (and only in the context of decided cases), and without any examples or attempts to create a “uniform legal citation” (s. 3.16 on E-54).
Transcripts are particularly problematic, because they use page and line number pinpoints, a type of pinpoint never addressed in the McGill Guide. I have seen “page 4–5, lns 14–3”, “4–5, lns 14–3”, “4 ln 14–5 ln 3”, “4–5:14–3”, and “4:14–5:3” all used to refer to the same pinpoint.
Without the guidance of the McGill Guide to resolve these unanswered questions, there will surely be bloodshed amongst librarians. Should a flame war start, I recommend attempting to change the subject to something less inflammatory, like which superhero is the best or which religion is probably right.
What does the 9th Edition tell us about life in 2018? It tells us that we should pay $76 for something that previously cost $66. Before, you could buy the McGill Guide and get a ticket to the latest The Fast and the Furious movie. Now it looks like you’ll have to pass on the movie. Or maybe you should pass on the McGill Guide. In either case, it’s just like the last one.
Actually, see the movie; here’s a list of the changes from the 8th Edition:
Jurisprudence
- If there is a neutral citation, any additional citation is now unnecessary
- Online sources of jurisprudence (such as CanLII) now have the same status as unofficial printed reporters
Periodicals
- Section 6.1 was called “Periodicals” in the 8th Edition; it is called “Legal Journals” in the 9th Edition
- If two issues of the same volume are published at once, the issues should now be separated with a slash (/) instead of an en dash (–):
- 8th Edition: Antony Anghie, “The War on Terror and Iraq in Historical Perspective” (2005) 43:1–2 Osgoode Hall LJ 45.
- 9th Edition: Antony Anghie, “The War on Terror and Iraq in Historical Perspective” (2005) 43:1/2 Osgoode Hall LJ 45.
Parliamentary Papers
- Parliamentary papers now use hyphenated numbers to identify the legislative session:
- 8th Edition: House of Commons Debates, 42nd Parl, 1st Sess, No 317 (19 June 2018) at 21300 (Hon Chrystia Freeland).
- 9th Edition: House of Commons Debates, 42-1, No 317 (19 June 2018) at 21300 (Hon Chrystia Freeland).
Digital Content
- A perma.cc archive URL is strongly recommended to be included at the end of the citation in square brackets, in addition to the original URL
- Time pinpoints are now placed in the middle rather than at the end of a citation
- The source of online content is now italicized
- Online videos must include “(video)” after the “online”:
- 8th Edition: CBC News: The National, “Beverley McLachlin reflects on Supreme Court career, dispute with PM Harper” (18 December 2017), online: YouTube <youtu.be/VLEogRtquaQ> at 00h:03m:42s.
- 9th Edition: CBC News: The National, “Beverley McLachlin reflects on Supreme Court career, dispute with PM Harper” (18 December 2017) at 00h:03m:42s, online (video): YouTube <youtu.be/VLEogRtquaQ> [perma.cc/4BJR-PDU4].
- PDF files should have a “(pdf)” placed after the “online” (similar to the video and podcast example):
- Health Canada, “Eating Well with Canada’s Food Guide” (2011) at 6, online (pdf): Health Canada <https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/hc-sc/migration/hc-sc/fn-an/alt_formats/hpfb-dgpsa/pdf/food-guide-aliment/print_eatwell_bienmang-eng.pdf>.
- Comment and tweets now use the month spelled out in full (e.g. February instead of Feb)
- Reddit posts are now cited with “posted on” (just as in Facebook posts), unlike the 8th Edition, which used “posted in”
- Podcasts are redone to be more consistent with other digital content:
- 8th Edition: “Divide and Conquer” (17 May 2018) (podcast), online: Revisionist History <revisionisthistory.com/episodes/21-divide-and-conquer>.
- 9th Edition: “Divide and Conquer” (17 May 2018), online (podcast): Revisionist History <revisionisthistory.com/episodes/21-divide-and-conquer>.
Other Secondary Sources
- The 9th Edition moves the section on Historical Legal Materials, including Roman law, Canon law, and Talmudic Law to Foreign Sources; they are otherwise unchanged
- The 9th Edition recommends a perma.cc archive URL be included at the end of the citation of online newspaper articles, as demonstrated above with digital content
Foreign Sources
- Citations for Australian legislation should now include the year and number in the form year/number:
- 8th Edition: Smoke-free Environment Act 2000 (NSW).
- 9th Edition: Smoke-free Environment Act 2000 (NSW), 2000/69.
- Citations for Singapore legislation and jurisprudence have been removed
- Citations for the European Union have been added: Chocoladefabriken Lindt & Sprüngli AG v Franz Hauswirth GmbH, C-529/07, [2009] ECR I-4893 at I-4896.
Appendix
- Appendix A-1 now refers to the common Canadian Postal Abbreviations for abbreviating Canadian jurisdictions outside of statutes, gazettes, regulations, courts, journals, and law reporters
- Appendix A-4 (Other Jurisdictional Abbreviations) now includes Hong Kong, which should be abbreviated as HK when referring to the jurisdiction
- Appendix A-5 includes more abbreviations (now Abbreviations in International Materials instead of Abbreviations of International Organizations)
McGill Law Journal‘s Response
The MLJ was provided with an advance draft of this piece. They respectfully disagree with some of the criticism (e.g., the McGill Guide is intended to give direction on citations as opposed to strict rules and that the Guide is aimed at law reviews, not practitioners) while conceding that typos are inexcusable. Below is their full comment:
Thank you again for sending along the article; we appreciate the opportunity to comment. Respectfully, we believe that the article mischaracterizes the Guide. It is simply incorrect to claim that the McGill Law Journal decides that everyone in the Canadian legal profession must change how they do their citations. The Journal publishes the Guide to give direction about how to approach citations; institutions and individuals choose to use it in different ways, and in turn, give it normative value. With that in mind, we try to reflect the changing needs and perspectives on its use with each new edition.
We certainly concede that the typos are inexcusable; similarly, we will aim for greater consistency and accuracy in the future regarding pinpoints and URLs. As to the comment that the removal of parallel citations where there is a neutral citation was long time coming… well, the former associate editor in me, tasked with finding these citations, could not agree more.
However, we do take issue with some of the comments made. For example, regarding what you deem an inconsistent order and style for bills and Hansard debates, the Guide follows the government’s Queen’s Printer and changes its instructions accordingly.
Finally, our Guide is centered on the law review. We consult with librarians, jurists, and other experts in creating the Guide with an emphasis on academic work. This shows in the strides we have made in comparative law and our moderate contribution to the citation of Indigenous law.
We are always open to feedback on the Guide and will take some of your critiques under advisement.
