<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Carly Dunster Law</title>
	<atom:link href="http://carlydunsterlaw.com/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://carlydunsterlaw.com</link>
	<description>Carly Dunster Law</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 Mar 2013 19:12:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>What I Talk About When I Talk About Food Law</title>
		<link>http://carlydunsterlaw.com/what-i-talk-about-when-i-talk-about-food-law/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=what-i-talk-about-when-i-talk-about-food-law</link>
		<comments>http://carlydunsterlaw.com/what-i-talk-about-when-i-talk-about-food-law/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 May 2012 20:32:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Carly Dunster</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://carlydunsterlaw.com/?p=297</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#160; This post likely should have been my first Carly Dunster Law blog post, but I think it’s as important to write it now as it ever was. Whenever I tell someone that I practice food law (and no, it’s not “food law”; a proper term requires no quotations around it, ahem), there are the inevitable questions:  “A food lawyer? What do you do? Is it like:  these nachos are soggy, call Carly Dunster!” Or, still not what I’m trying to get at with the practice but a little better, “If I get sick at [insert fast food chain], should &#8230; <a href="http://carlydunsterlaw.com/what-i-talk-about-when-i-talk-about-food-law/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://carlydunsterlaw.com/what-i-talk-about-when-i-talk-about-food-law/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Toronto’s Union Station Revitalization:  Revitalizing Street Food Vendors Right Out of the Picture</title>
		<link>http://carlydunsterlaw.com/torontos-union-station-revitalization-revitalizing-street-food-vendors-right-out-of-the-picture/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=torontos-union-station-revitalization-revitalizing-street-food-vendors-right-out-of-the-picture</link>
		<comments>http://carlydunsterlaw.com/torontos-union-station-revitalization-revitalizing-street-food-vendors-right-out-of-the-picture/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Mar 2012 15:21:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Carly Dunster</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://carlydunsterlaw.com/?p=291</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#160; Revitalization. Beautification. Rejuvenation. All terms with positive connotations, that conjure up images of something better for city-goers…a more aesthetically pleasing, vibrant streetscape, a historical building restored to its prime, more green space. But sometimes the drive for beautification can have significant negative impacts – collateral damage, if you will. In the case of the Union Station revitalization, some of those negative impacts come in the form of taking away the livelihoods of six street food vendors. The design for Union Station, at this point, does not contemplate a designated spot for any of these individuals, some of whom have &#8230; <a href="http://carlydunsterlaw.com/torontos-union-station-revitalization-revitalizing-street-food-vendors-right-out-of-the-picture/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://carlydunsterlaw.com/torontos-union-station-revitalization-revitalizing-street-food-vendors-right-out-of-the-picture/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Right to Food</title>
		<link>http://carlydunsterlaw.com/right-to-food/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=right-to-food</link>
		<comments>http://carlydunsterlaw.com/right-to-food/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Mar 2012 23:25:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Carly Dunster</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://carlydunsterlaw.com/?p=284</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Many of the rights codified in our Charter of Rights and Freedoms are predicated on having enough food. How can one have life, liberty and security of the person without having enough to eat? How can one pursue the gaining of a livelihood in any province if one is starving?  How can one live out any of their rights and freedoms when they are preoccupied with where their next meal will come from? What’s being called the “Canadian Right to Food Trial” is taking place in Calgary this week. It was brought forward by Paul Hughes, a food activist and head of &#8230; <a href="http://carlydunsterlaw.com/right-to-food/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://carlydunsterlaw.com/right-to-food/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Food Labelling &#8211; Food Safety’s Neglected Younger Sibling</title>
		<link>http://carlydunsterlaw.com/food-labelling-food-safetys-neglected-younger-sibling/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=food-labelling-food-safetys-neglected-younger-sibling</link>
		<comments>http://carlydunsterlaw.com/food-labelling-food-safetys-neglected-younger-sibling/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Feb 2012 20:01:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Carly Dunster</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://carlydunsterlaw.com/?p=238</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[At the beginning of February, CBC News wrote about an investigation undertaken by the TV show Marketplace, that uncovered that Maple Leaf Foods had been violating Canada’s laws and regulations concerning food labelling. Some processed meat from the company’s Natural Selections line was tested in a lab and found to contain an ingredient that had the same bio-chemical identity as a nitrite. Trouble was, the package indicated, loud and clear, that there were ‘no preservatives added’. A nitrite is most definitely a preservative. One of the key pieces of legislation that governs food labelling in Canada is The Food and &#8230; <a href="http://carlydunsterlaw.com/food-labelling-food-safetys-neglected-younger-sibling/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://carlydunsterlaw.com/food-labelling-food-safetys-neglected-younger-sibling/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Canadian Food Summit, From a Food Lawyer’s Perspective</title>
		<link>http://carlydunsterlaw.com/the-canadian-food-summit-from-a-food-lawyers-perspective/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-canadian-food-summit-from-a-food-lawyers-perspective</link>
		<comments>http://carlydunsterlaw.com/the-canadian-food-summit-from-a-food-lawyers-perspective/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 21:09:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Carly Dunster</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://carlydunsterlaw.com/?p=227</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Last week I attended the two-day Canadian Food Summit, put on by the Conference Board of Canada (CBOC). In 2010, the CBOC launched the Centre for Food in Canada, with a twofold mandate:  to increase public awareness of the food sector in Canada, and to work towards building a Canadian Food Strategy. The Summit was the first attempt to bring together people working in all corners of the food sector:  big food, small food, processors, producers, farmers, food safety folks, community initiatives, those working in supply chain management, non-profits, and even a few lawyers. It’s not often, at least in &#8230; <a href="http://carlydunsterlaw.com/the-canadian-food-summit-from-a-food-lawyers-perspective/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://carlydunsterlaw.com/the-canadian-food-summit-from-a-food-lawyers-perspective/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Don Staniford on BC Salmon Farming:  Defamer or Truth-Teller?</title>
		<link>http://carlydunsterlaw.com/don-staniford-on-bc-salmon-farming-defamer-or-truth-teller/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=don-staniford-on-bc-salmon-farming-defamer-or-truth-teller</link>
		<comments>http://carlydunsterlaw.com/don-staniford-on-bc-salmon-farming-defamer-or-truth-teller/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 14:31:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Carly Dunster</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://carlydunsterlaw.com/?p=194</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Supreme Court of British Columbia is currently hearing a case that some have referred to as a classic David and Goliath battle: Mainstream Canada, BC’s second-largest salmon company, is suing Don Staniford, an environmental activist, for defamation. About a year ago, Staniford launched a provocative campaign entitled ‘Salmon Farming Kills’. The campaign’s imagery was fashioned after the warnings on cigarette packs, and included phrases like ‘Salmon Farms are Cancer’ and ‘Salmon Farming Causes Disease’. Court documents indicate that Mainstream is seeking $100,000 in general damages, $25,000 in punitive damages, and an injunction to permanently stop Staniford from defaming Mainstream, &#8230; <a href="http://carlydunsterlaw.com/don-staniford-on-bc-salmon-farming-defamer-or-truth-teller/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://carlydunsterlaw.com/don-staniford-on-bc-salmon-farming-defamer-or-truth-teller/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Cottage Food Laws: Should Canada Give Them a Go?</title>
		<link>http://carlydunsterlaw.com/cottage-food-laws-should-canada-give-them-a-go/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=cottage-food-laws-should-canada-give-them-a-go</link>
		<comments>http://carlydunsterlaw.com/cottage-food-laws-should-canada-give-them-a-go/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2012 18:08:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Carly Dunster</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://carlydunsterlaw.com/?p=162</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Cottage food laws have been passed in 31 American states, including Texas, Florida, and New York. Nine states have pending cottage food laws, at various stages of debate and approval. The gist of these laws is the same (though the details of the legislation vary greatly):  they allow individuals to cook low-risk food items in their homes and sell and distribute them to the public. The impetus behind the law is a removal of the major stumbling block for start-up food entrepreneurs:  access to a commercial kitchen. A certified commercial kitchen in most major centres will run you at least &#8230; <a href="http://carlydunsterlaw.com/cottage-food-laws-should-canada-give-them-a-go/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://carlydunsterlaw.com/cottage-food-laws-should-canada-give-them-a-go/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
