Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Recognizing Substantive Equality As A Foundational Constitutional Principle, Patricia Hughes
Recognizing Substantive Equality As A Foundational Constitutional Principle, Patricia Hughes
Dalhousie Law Journal
The author proposes that substantive equality be recognized as a foundational constitutional principle. The foundational principles--or underlying constitutional norms-which constitute the constitutional framework have become more important as Canada matures as a regime governed by constitutional supremacy. Most prime social and political values have been recognized as underlying constitutional norms, including democracy, federalism, protection of minority rights, political speech and judicial independence. Although section 15 of the Charter has been interpreted as encompassing substantive equality, which has been identified as a significant social value by the Supreme Court of Canada, the Court has yet to include it among the foundational …
Canada In Question: Federalism In The Seventies, David Covert
Canada In Question: Federalism In The Seventies, David Covert
Dalhousie Law Journal
Canada in Question is an apt title for D. V. Smiley's book discussing federalism in the seventies and the future of the Canadian federalist system. In this second edition, not only does he incorporate recent developments but he expands and re-casts several chapters in order to provide the reader with a more comprehensive coverage of the Canadian federal system. Smiley, in the first seven chapters, deals almost exclusively with the structures and processes of Canadian federalism, whereas the final three chapters are devoted to what he terms a more "speculative analysis of the relations between these structures and processes" (p. …
The Case Against Entrenchment Of A Canadian Bill Of Rights, Douglas A. Schmeiser
The Case Against Entrenchment Of A Canadian Bill Of Rights, Douglas A. Schmeiser
Dalhousie Law Journal
A limited form of judicial review has always been a prominent feature of Canadian federalism. Immediately after confederation, Canadian Courts assumed the jurisdiction to declare a statute to be beyond the legislative competence of the enacting body.' Until comparatively recently, Courts have also assumed that a totality of unrestricted legislative power resides in Parliament and the Provincial legislatures, i.e., as long as legislative jurisdiction exists, there is no limitation on the nature of legislation which may be passed.