Droit + Tech

Dans le cadre de son nouveau cycle de conférence En 2 mots / In 2 Words, la Chaire L.R. Wilson est heureuse d’annoncer l’organiser de la conférence « Droit + Tech » le 15 mars 2016.



Panel 1 – Enjeux liés à la cyber santé

  • Yann Joly (Université McGill)
    Transhumanism and governance: A possible connection between genetic engineering and cybernetics
    In recent months, the development of technology that could be used to edit the human genome has increasingly sparked bioethical debate over the question of how these methods should be regulated in a clinical context. However, some experts believe there is sufficient demand for disease prevention or trait selection to ensure that research into human germline editing will continue regardless of whether any binding regulations are implemented. Therefore, normative deliberations should additionally be informed through descriptive ethics methods. We will present the foundation of a pilot project aimed at assessing stakeholder’s values regarding germline editing. The elevance of this type of questioning and research methodology for the field of cybernetics will hopefully be answered through this conference.
    Présentation PPT | Vidéo
  • Ian Kerr (Université d’Ottawa)
    Robots and their Human Counterparts: How AI and Robotics Could Change Medical Practice and its Regulation
    This presentation investigates the changing landscape of medical practice as artificial intelligence (AI) and robotics are increasingly employed in the health sector. In a foresighting exercise, Ian considers some of the thorny law and policy implications sure to arise if robots and AI surpass their human counterparts at performing surgeries, diagnosing illness, and treating disease.
    Présentation PPT | Vidéo
  • Catherine Régis (Université de Montréal)
    Should there be a legal obligation to us e-health technology in health care systems?
    This presentation will give some benchmarks to consider when assessing the opportunity to introduce and define a legal obligation to use e-health technology in health care systems.
    Présentation PPT | Vidéo
  • Ma’n H. Zawati (Université McGill)
    Research Apps and Consent to Health Research: One Click Away?
    Tech companies, such as Apple and Google, have recently introduced research kits aimed at providing developers with a template to create apps allowing researchers to both retrieve health data stored in smartphones and collect their own data for research purposes. While the goal of these apps is to streamline recruitment, many questions are raised when it comes to the informed nature of the consent used. This presentation will discuss this issue and assess the type of framework needed to guide such practices.
    Présentation PPT | Vidéo


Panel 2 – Enjeux liés au cyber et à la surveillance

  • Paul Daly (Université de Montréal)
    Prescribing Surveillance by Law
    The common law of judicial review of administrative action has treated broad discretionary powers in an impressively robust way, refusing to permit the existence of unfettered regulatory discretion, instead imposing boundaries of acceptability on potentially abusive official conduct. But what has been a success in the area of administrative law has become a pathology in constitutional law. When charged with ensuring that government action is “prescribed by law” – that is, foreseeable and predictable – common law courts’ tendency to ensure that discretionary powers have at least some limits has caused them to permit the use of extremely broad powers. On the logic of the common lawyer, although the powers are extremely broad, they are not unfettered and must as a result be “prescribed by law”. In the area of government surveillance, however, the common law approach is inadequate – and sometimes, unfortunately smug: broad powers are often used secretly, in ways that are neither foreseeable nor predictable. To meet these inadequacies, common lawyers need to show some humility, by devising methods of ensuring predictability and foreseeability in governmental action that transcend the boundary between administrative law and constitutional law. These methods, which rely in part on the use of soft law and on imposing a robust requirement of reasonableness on official action, can properly be described as public law, as they are unique neither to administrative law or constitutional law and thus free of the pathology mentioned above.
  • Pierre-Luc Déziel (Université de Montréal)
    Cybersurveillance et santé publique
    One cannot and should not think of cybersurveillance without thinking about protection of privacy, and vice-versa. But what is the relationship between these two concepts, those two practices? More than often, we think of protection of privacy and cybersurveillance has conflicting interests, has if they were both engaged in some sort of zero-sum game. This leads to the notion that privacy and surveillance (or individual freedom and collective security) has to be balanced against one another. There are some cases where this is actually what has to be done, cases were privacy and surveillance are incompatible (FBI v Apple).  By drawing on the example of syndromic surveillance of infectious diseases and the use of personal health information, I will demonstrate that there are cases where protecting privacy and conducting efficient cybersurveillance activities is possible and desirable. I will then conclude that, as jurists, we ought to distance ourselves from this reflex of viewing privacy and cybersurveillance as necessarily conflicting and mutually exclusive concepts.
  • Michael Geist (Université d’Ottawa)
    « Now What?: Canadian Privacy and Surveillance Law in the Post-Snowden Environment »
    Years of surveillance-related leaks from US whistleblower Edward Snowden have fuelled an international debate on privacy, spying, and Internet surveillance. Much of the focus has centered on the role of the US National Security Agency, yet there is an important Canadian side to the story. The Communications Security Establishment, the Canadian counterpart to the NSA, has played an active role in surveillance activities both at home and abroad, raising a host of challenging legal and policy questions.
    Présentation PPT | Vidéo
  • Éloïse Gratton (BLG)
    Big Data et Analytiques : Enjeux juridiques et éthiques en matière de consentement
    À l’ère du Big Data, de nouveaux modèles d’affaires et techniques marketing font leur apparition. Les entreprises canadiennes qui capturent et analysent de grandes quantités de données doivent s’assurer d’utiliser des renseignements personnels  en respectant les lois applicables. Par exemple, elles doivent s’assurer que les renseignements utilisées sont correctement dépersonnalisés ou alors elles doivent obtenir un consentement valable de leurs clients, lequel devra respecter les «attentes raisonnables» de ces derniers.  La présentation discutera des défis qu’ont les entreprises en pratique à faire en sorte que leurs pratiques en matière d’analytiques soient conformes à la loi, ainsi que des enjeux en matière d’éthique qui doivent nécessairement être considérés.
    Présentation PPT | Vidéo


Les interventions auront lieu en français et en anglais. À l’issue des présentations des conférenciers, une période de discussion entre les intervenants et la salle aura lieu.


Entrée gratuite mais inscription obligatoire.

Formation d’un dispensateur reconnu aux fins de la formation continue obligatoire du Barreau du Québec pour une durée de 3 heures. Une attestation de participation valant pour 3 heures de formation juridique sera transmise aux notaires.



Formulaire d’Inscription

Les inscriptions sont fermées.

Ce contenu a été mis à jour le 18 mars 2016 à 0 h 31 min.