The use of dots and other punctuation marks for acronyms and abbreviations in legal citations – Food for though
FP, 2009-05-19
[1]	For anyone doing legal research in Canada, mastering the art of punctuation has almost become a required skill for the “accuracy” of citations or the completeness of research. Omitting a bracket, a space or a dot here and there can make documents difficult or impossible to retrieve from certain digital databases.
[2]	This paper is contemplating a reform to the way legal citations are styled so as to simplify them and improve the efficiency of the Canadian legal citation standards with respect to punctuation. The goal is to keep using only those characters which convey information that allows to efficiently referring to these documents.
[3]	A change that could be made rather easily would be to omit all dots from acronyms or abbreviations. The following table shows a few examples.
Current standard
(widely accepted but certain dots are already omitted by some publishers or official printers)	Dots omitted	
Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. 1 (5th Supp.)	Income Tax Act, RSC 1985, c 1 (5th Supp)	
Executive Council Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. E.25	Executive Council Act, RSO 1990, c E25	
N.H.A. Designated Areas Order, S.O.R./84-686	NHA Designated Areas Order, SOR/84-686	
R. v. N.T.C. Smokehouse Ltd., [1996] 2 S.C.R. 672	R v NTC Smokehouse Ltd, [1996] 2 SCR 672	
R.V.P. Ent. Ltd. v. B.C. Min. of Consumer & Corporate Affairs (1987), 37 D.L.R. (4th) 148; [1988] 31 C.R.R. 179; [1987] 24 Admin. L.R. 176; 12 B.C.L.R. (2d) 244	RVP Ent Ltd v BC Min of Consumer & Corporate Affairs (1987), 37 DLR (4th) 148; [1988] 31 CRR 179; [1987] 24 Admin LR 176; 12 BCLR (2d) 244	
[4]	Of course there would be exceptions for dots which convey meaning such as those that are part of a rational number, e.g. “G-4.1”.
[5]	Among the benefits of this proposal are the following :
•	Reduced number of keystrokes for authors and users of legal databases;
•	Since the current use of dots is not consistent among different publishers, knowing that all dots are not required would simplify the citation standards;
•	Omitting dots is a trend in the publishing industry (see The Canadian Style, 2nd Ed, p 20, « 1.03 Periods »), which has not fully reached the legal realm in Canada, but has been implemented in other countries such as Australia and the United Kingdom.
[6]	There could be some drawbacks to this standard’s implementation, one of the most important being related to search engines. Search queries would have to be “dot-insensitive” so that users do not have to worry about adding or omitting dots when typing a query containing a legal citation. Online publishers would have to make sure that their search engine complies with the new standard as well as the old one so that the same documents are always retrieved.
[7]	Some space characters, as well as dashes, could also be omitted from legal citations, especially with respect to legislation. Several Canadian Queen’s Printers have already taken that step further to various extent – with or without the omission of dots ‑, as for instance:
•	Alberta: RSA 2000 cD‑2 s1, SA 2002 c11 s2
•	New Brunswick: RSNB 1973, c.A-3, SNB 2004, c.19, s.1
•	Saskatchewan: R.S.S. 1978, c.P-42, s.50
•	Newfoundland & Labrador: RSN1970 c126 s1
•	Manitoba: C.C.S.M. c. D30