News

On October 14, 2026, more than 125 people gathered at the Weldon Law Building for the 2026 Smith Shield Moot. With a tradition dating back to 1927, it continues to be the premiere mooting event of the academic calendar. Students are chosen from the top mooters in the compulsory second-year moots to take part in the non-credit exhibition, where two opposing teams argue a hypothetical appeal before a panel of judges and an audience made up of friends, family, and members of the Schulich Law community.

This year’s mooters, Kiara Brunink, Beth Gouda, Connor Laskoski, and Adam Roberts, argued the case of N.S. v Canada (Attorney General) before the Honourable Chief Justice Michael J. Wood (LLB ’82), Nova Scotia Court of Appeal; the Honourable Justice Darlene Jamieson (LLB '88), Associate Chief Justice, Supreme Court of Nova Scotia; and Nicole MacIsaac, Member of Council for South West District for the Nova Scotia Barristers’ Society.

(L-R): Moot judges Jamieson, Wood, and MacIsaac (Photo by Bruce Bottomley)

The competition focused on a fictional case involving mental illness and access to medical assistance in dying (MAiD). The appeal dealt with two questions. First, could Parliament impose additional safeguards on MAiD applicants whose sole underlying medical condition is a mental illness without infringing on their rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms? And second, did a requirement that MAiD assessors notify a family member of a patient’s such request violate their Charter rights? Brunink and Laskoski represented the appellant, N.S., while Gouda and Roberts represented the respondent, the Attorney General of Canada.

Schulich Law Associate Professor Jodi Lazare served as faculty supervisor and coach and drafted the problem. “The question of access to medical assistance for people suffering from serious mental health challenges is a live debate in Canada,” she says. “And questions of privacy in healthcare are always relevant, especially at a time when privacy seems to diminish every day. Combining both these current issues enabled students to grapple with some of the hardest questions in Canadian healthcare today – issues that audience members would also be able to relate to and reflect on.”

According to the case, N.S., a 42-year-old Halifax resident with severe, treatment-resistant depression, was found eligible for MAiD after multiple assessors confirmed they had decision-making capacity, were acting voluntarily, and understood the consequences of their choice. However, the Medical Assistance in Dying Safeguards Act meant that N.S. had to wait 12 months before receiving MAiD and that a member of their estranged family would have to be notified.

N.S. challenged both provisions under the Charter, arguing that the waiting period violated equality rights and that the family-notification requirement infringed rights to life, liberty, and security of the person. The application judge agreed and declared both unconstitutional. The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal later overturned that decision, leading to an appeal to the Supreme Moot Court of Dalhousie, which had to determine the constitutionality of the provisions, and whether any infringement can be justified under section 1.

“The mooters dove into the problem with enthusiasm, working hard to create excellent written submission and strong oral arguments,” shares Lazare. “They argued their cases like professionals, fielding tough questions from the bench and highlighting the policy implications at stake in N.S.’s case. They all deserve recognition for their hard work.”   

Kiara Brunink and Beth Gouda were named this year’s winners and received the A.S. Pattillo Prize in Advocacy. The runners-up were Connor Laskoski and Adam Roberts, who were recognized with the Leonard A. Kitz Prize in Advocacy. Reilly Brennan served as this year’s alternate.

(L-R): Brunink and Gouda (Photo by Bruce Bottomley)

“It was an honour to participate in the Smith Shield. I learned so much throughout the process, and I was unbelievably impressed by the talent and dedication of my fellow mooters,” says Brunink. “I’m very grateful for everyone who supported us along the way and helped make this such an amazing experience!”

Gouda echoed her fellow mooter’s sentiments and added a special thanks to Professor Lazare. “I am so proud to be able to count myself amongst nearly a century of Smith Shield mooters, including those I was fortunate to have had the opportunity to cross paths with and learn from over the past two years, who I really look up to.”

Congratulations to the students who took part in this year’s Smith Shield Moot and a special thank you to the judges and members of the Weldon community for making this year's event a success.

The Schulich School of Law looks forward to continuing the tradition next year, when the Smith Shield Moot celebrates its 100^th anniversary!

(L-R): Laskoski, Brunink, Jaimeson, Wood, MacIsaac, Gouda, and Roberts. (Photo by Bruce Bottomley)