General Rules
2 References: In-Text, Footnotes & End of Paragraph
Overview
Specific types of legal writing require different methods of citation: footnotes, in-text, or end of paragraph citations. Use only one method of citation. Never combine them in a single document. Memorandums often use on footnotes. Facta often use end of paragraph citations. Always check with the authority receiving the document to determine the preferred method of citation.
All methods of citation allow the reader to easily identify the authorities that support the arguments, interpretations, and ideas that have been expressed. They make legal writing authoritative and credible, and acknowledge the value of the original creator’s work.
In-Text
In-text references are made within the body text of the document. They are sometimes referred to as parenthetical references.
In-text citations appear immediately following the referenced material. This can be midsentence or at the end of a sentence.
The first reference to an authority requires a full citation. If the source will be referred to at least once more, include a short form in square brackets following the in-text citation. Subsequent citations will refer to the short form instead of the full citation.
Mid-sentence in-text references occur when the source is referred to directly in text. The full citation appears in-text at the first reference and using the short form for subsequent citations.
End of sentence in-text references occur when the source is referred to indirectly. The citation appears in parentheses at the end of the sentence.
Examples: In-Text References
Edited excerpt is from Canada (AG) v Power, 2024 SCC 26 (Memorandum, Applicant).
The first reference to an authority requires a full citation. These are highlighted in blue.
Subsequent references use a short form. These are highlighted in orange.
The Court of Appeal’s approach cannot be correct in light of the principles stressed in (Mikisew Cree First Nation v Canada (Governor General In Council), 2018 SCC 40 [Mikisew Cree]). Although that decision was about the duty to consult, not section 24(1) damages (Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s 24(1), Part I of the Constitution Act, 1982, being Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (UK), 1982, c 11 [Charter]), protecting the integrity of the law-making process from judicial interference was a central concern for all seven of the judges who decided against recognizing the duty therein (Mikisew Cree at paras 148, 169, 170). Justice Karakatsanis held that the development of legislation by ministers and those who assist them is part of the law-making process, which is generally protected from judicial oversight (Mikisew Cree at para 34). Justice Brown, concurred with by Justices Rowe, Moldaver and Côté (Mikisew Cree at para 148), expressed it as an outright prohibition: the development, drafting and introduction of bills are immune from judicial interference (Mikisew Cree at para 102).
This is consistent with longstanding authority. The formulation and introduction of a bill are part of the legislative process and beyond the reach of the courts (Reference Re Canada Assistance Plan (BC), [1991] 2 SCR 525 at 559, 1991 CanLII 74). Parliament’s sovereignty when engaged in the performance of its legislative duties is undoubted (Canada (House of Commons) v Vaid, 2005 SCC 30 at para 45). This Court has consistently emphasized that the enactment of laws is the fundamental role of legislatures and that “[c]ourts come into the picture when legislation is enacted and not before” (Reference Re Resolution to amend the Constitution, [1981] 1 SCR 753 at 785, 1981 CanLII 25). Whether it is Ministers developing and introducing bills, or Parliament enacting them, this Court has repeatedly stated the importance of safeguarding the role of the legislative branch.
The appellate decision does not respect the separation of powers (Canada (AG) v Power, 2022 NBCA 14; Constitution Act, 1867 (UK), 30 & 31 Vict, c 3, s 91–92, reprinted in RSC 1985, Appendix II, No 5). The fact that an intrusion by the judicial branch into the law-making process occurs post-enactment does not make it acceptable (Mikisew Cree at para 38). The Court of Appeal erroneously held that, because the assessment for potential liability for Charter damages would be after-the-fact, there was no interference (Power at para 23; Charter, s 24(1)). However, this Court rejected this very distinction in Mikisew Cree: “[a]pplying the duty to consult doctrine during the law-making process would lead to significant judicial incursion into the workings of the legislature, even if such a duty were only enforced postenactment” (Mikisew Cree at para 38).
Footnotes
Footnotes are located at the bottom of the page in a numbered list. Footnote numbers correspond with a superscript number within the body text.
For a direct reference to a source (e.g. a quote) the superscript number appears immediately following the punctuation.
For an indirect reference (e.g. interpreting, paraphrasing, or synthesising information) the superscript number appears at the end of the sentence immediately following the period.
Footnote numbers begin with 1 and continue in numerical sequence throughout the entire document. Use the “Insert Footnote” function in your word processor to automatically create and sort footnotes sequentially.
The first reference to an authority requires a full citation. If the source will be referred to at least once more, include a short form in square brackets at the end of the citation. Subsequent citations will refer to the short form instead of the full citation.
When including more than one citation in the same footnote, separate your sources using a semicolon.
Each footnote citation ends with a period.
Examples: Footnotes
Edited excerpt is from Canada (AG) v Power, 2024 SCC 26 (Memorandum, Applicant).
The first reference to an authority requires a full citation. These are highlighted in blue.
Subsequent references use a short form. These are highlighted in orange.
The Court of Appeal’s approach cannot be correct in light of the principles stressed in Mikisew Cree.1 Although that decision was about the duty to consult, not s 24(1) damages,2 protecting the integrity of the law-making process from judicial interference was a central concern for all seven of the judges who decided against recognizing the duty therein.3 Justice Karakatsanis held that the development of legislation by ministers and those who assist them is part of the law-making process, which is generally protected from judicial oversight.4 Justice Brown, concurred with by Justices Rowe, Moldaver and Côté,5 expressed it as an outright prohibition: the development, drafting and introduction of bills are immune from judicial interference.6
This is consistent with longstanding authority. The formulation and introduction of a bill are part of the legislative process and beyond the reach of the courts.7 Parliament’s sovereignty when engaged in the performance of its legislative duties is undoubted.8 This Court has consistently emphasized that the enactment of laws is the fundamental role of legislatures and that “[c]ourts come into the picture when legislation is enacted and not before.”9 Whether it is Ministers developing and introducing bills, or Parliament enacting them, this Court has repeatedly stated the importance of safeguarding the role of the legislative branch.
The appellate decision does not respect the separation of powers.10 The fact that an intrusion by the judicial branch into the law-making process occurs post-enactment does not make it acceptable.11 The Court of Appeal erroneously held that, because the assessment for potential liability for section 24(1) damages would be after-the-fact, there was no interference.12 However, this Court rejected this very distinction in Mikisew Cree: “[a]pplying the duty to consult doctrine during the law-making process would lead to significant judicial incursion into the workings of the legislature, even if such a duty were only enforced postenactment.”13
1 Mikisew Cree First Nation v Canada (Governor General In Council), 2018 SCC 40 [Mikisew Cree].
2 Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s 24(1), Part I of the Constitution Act, 1982, being Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (UK), 1982, c 11 [Charter].
3 Mikisew Cree at paras 128, 169—170.
4 Ibid at para 34.
5 Ibid at para 148.
6 Ibid at para 102.
7 Reference Re Canada Assistance Plan (BC), [1991] 2 SCR 525 at 559, 1991 CanLII 74.
8 (Canada (House of Commons) v Vaid, 2005 SCC 30 at para 45).
9 Reference Re Resolution to amend the Constitution, [1981] 1 SCR 753 at 785, 1981 CanLII 25.
10 Canada (AG) v Power, 2022 NBCA 14 [Power]; Constitution Act, 1867 (UK), 30 & 31 Vict, c 3, s 91–92, reprinted in RSC 1985, Appendix II, No 5.
11 Supra note 3 at para 38.
12 Power, supra note 10 at para 23; Charter, supra note 2, s 24(1).
13 Supra note 3 at para 38.
End of Paragraph
End of paragraph citation is commonly used for factums. They are citations that immediately follow each paragraph, as shown in the example below.
The first reference to an authority requires a full citation. When using end of paragraph citations, include a short form in square brackets at the end of every citation. Subsequent citations will refer to the short form instead of the full citation.
If multiple sources are relied upon in a single paragraph the short form must be used in-text. The short form follows the sentence or sentences where the source is relied upon in round brackets (e.g., “The laws that criminalized physician-assisted death for competent adult persons were declared invalid by the Supreme Court of Canada in 2015 (Carter).”) When there are multiple sources in a single paragraph the end of paragraph citations are listed in the order the sources appear in the paragraph.
The short form does not need to be used in-text if only one source is relied upon.
Use supra to refer back to the paragraph where the source was first mentioned. End of paragraph citations do not use Ibid. This is because citations are specific to a single paragraph and concise legal writing should eliminate the need to refer to a source intermittently in a paragraph.
Pinpoints occur in the order they were referenced in the paragraph text. If you are using the same authority twice in one paragraph, you need to organise the pinpoints in the order they appear in the factum rather than by order of appearance within the source.
Citations are indented and written in 10 point font.
Examples: End of Paragraph Citations
The first reference to an authority requires a full citation and the creation of a short form. These are highlighted in blue.
Subsequent references use a short form. These are highlighted in orange.
NOTE: Factum paragraphs should be double spaced in 12 point font, while end of paragraph citations should be single spaced in 10 point font.
[11] In order to correctly interpret a statute, it is required that “the words of an Act are to be read in their entire context and in their grammatical and ordinary sense harmoniously with the scheme of the Act, the object of the Act, and the intention of Parliament” (Clark). This argument will focus on the principles of statutory construction and underlying policy considerations to analyze the proper interpretation of the element of issue in this appeal (Lohnes).
R v Clark, 2005 SCC 2 at para 43 [Clark].
R v Lohnes, 1992 CanLII 112 SCC at 200 [Lohnes].
*** Page Break***
[23] The word “at” should include where the accused is located to not render “into” redundant. Parliament consciously chose to modify the place requirement in 244.2(1)(a) with the words “into or at.” The word “into”, in the context of shooting into a place, implies a directional component or that it was “in the direction” of the place. Parliament would not have included “at” if it served the same purpose. In the context of this case, if “at” were to be given a directional interpretation, then shooting “at the attic” or “into the attic” have virtually the same meaning. By including “at or into,” the two words must have different meanings within the offence.
Clark, supra para 11, at para 48.
End of Paragraph Citation Cheat Sheet
- Number your paragraphs
- Create a short form for every source you have cited
- Citations immediately follow each paragraph (end of paragraph citation)
- Citations are organised in the order they appear in the paragraph
- Citations are indented
- Citations are written in 10pt font
- Use supra to refer back to the paragraph where the source was first mentioned
- Do NOT use ibid in a factum
- Pinpoints occur in the order they were referenced in the paragraph text
