Administrative decision-makers must not only grapple with writing clear decisions in plain language, they must also comply with directions, provided by the Supreme Court of Canada in Vavilov, Mason, and Pepa, on writing “reasonable” analysis, “justified in relation to the constellation of law and facts that are relevant to the decision,” paying particular attention to the impact of the decision on the individual affected by it. This practical workshop will provide clear guidance on how to write decisions that meet those standards.

This year’s workshop features a new section on how to responsibly use AI to edit decisions (where permitted) and other correspondence. The workshop will teach attendees the right prompts and approaches to using AI for editing, and does not teach or endorse using AI to write substantive content. Topics of discussion include:

• Revisiting the core principles set out by the Supreme Court of Canada in Vavilov, Mason, and Pepa
• Incorporating the concept of “proportionality” for decisions that engage Charter rights or values
• Appreciating jurisdictional issues and how to address questions of jurisdiction in decisions
• Fine-tuning the use of plain language so that decisions are accessible but also legally accurate
  • Avoiding boilerplate language and legalese
• Utilizing headings, paragraphs, and structuring the decision logically
  • Developing strategies to shorten decisions without detracting from key principles
• Crafting precise prompts to instruct AI to assist with editing responsibly and effectively