Suggestions
Albert Frank
Lawyer
Albert Frank is a business and trial lawyer based in the United States, known for his strategic approach to legal practice. He is the founder and principal of Albert S. Frank, a law firm that specializes in business law, litigation, and providing strategic advice to clients across various industries.
Professional Background::
- Albert Frank has extensive experience in both business and legal sectors, allowing him to navigate complex legal issues with a keen understanding of business dynamics.
- His firm focuses on representing clients in commercial disputes, contract negotiations, and other legal matters that require both legal expertise and strategic insight.
Education and Qualifications::
- Albert holds a law degree and is licensed to practice law in his jurisdiction. His educational background equips him with the necessary skills to handle various legal challenges effectively.
Approach to Law::
- Frank emphasizes a client-centered approach, aiming to provide tailored solutions that meet the specific needs of each client. His strategy often involves proactive risk management and strategic planning to help businesses avoid legal pitfalls.
LinkedIn Presence::
- On LinkedIn, under the username "albertfrank," he shares insights related to legal trends, business strategies, and updates about his practice. This platform serves as a valuable resource for networking and engaging with other professionals in the legal and business communities.
Overall, Albert Frank is recognized for his dual expertise in law and business strategy, making him a valuable asset for clients seeking comprehensive legal representation.
Highlights
Protest Rights in Canada?
Many of us have heard Prime Minister Trudeau's hostile comments about the truckers of the Freedom Convoy. We know about the efforts to keep food, fuel, and funds from truckers who, on the face of it, are peaceful demonstrators.
What rights do the truckers have to protest, if the protest annoys the government?
I am reminded of the case of Roncarelli v. Duplessis, decided by the Supreme Court of Canada in 1959: [1959] SCR 121. Duplessis, premier and attorney-general of Quebec, was annoyed by the Witnesses of Jehovah, a religious group he saw as a small fringe minority with unacceptable views.
The Witnesses were publishing and selling religious tracts, and many of them were charged under City of Montreal by-laws for distributing, peddling, and canvassing without a licence. Roncarelli, a local restauranteur, acted as surety and provided bail for many of the Witnesses. This was obviously a perfectly legal thing for him to do.
But doing so was helpful to the Witnesses so Duplessis ordered the Quebec Liquor Commission to yank Roncarelli's liquor licence. The Supreme Court of Canada found that Duplessis was wrong to make the order, and the Quebec Liquor Commission was wrong to obey it. Roncarelli was awarded damages.
In future will the government and police be seen as having acted legally and reasonably against the truckers, or will they be seen as oppressors acting against human rights, as generations of law students have seen Duplessis?
#
It is easy to jump to the conclusion that Prime Minister Trudeau is lying like crazy about the truckers of the Freedom Convoy. But it is also possible that he is greatly misinformed, or I am.
