Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Searching And Seizing After 9/11: Developing And Applying Empirical Methodology To Measure Judicial Output Inthe Supreme Court's Section 8 Jurisprudence, Richard Jochelson, Michael Weinrath, Melaine Janelle Murchison
Searching And Seizing After 9/11: Developing And Applying Empirical Methodology To Measure Judicial Output Inthe Supreme Court's Section 8 Jurisprudence, Richard Jochelson, Michael Weinrath, Melaine Janelle Murchison
Dalhousie Law Journal
In 2005, Margit Cohn and Mordechai Kremnitzer created a multidimensional model to measure judicial discourse inherent in the decision making of constitutional courts. Their model set out multiple indicia bywhich to measure whether the court acted within proper constitutional constraints in order to determine the extent to which a court rendered a decision that was activist or restrained. This study attempts to operationalize that model. We use this model to analyze changes in interpretation of search and seizure law under section 8 after the enactment of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms at the Supreme Court of Canada. The …
Framing The Issues For Cameras In The Courtrooms: Redefining Judicial Dignity And Decorum, A Wayne Mackay
Framing The Issues For Cameras In The Courtrooms: Redefining Judicial Dignity And Decorum, A Wayne Mackay
Dalhousie Law Journal
This article examines the role of s. 2(b) of the Charter of Rights in determining the role of cameras in Canadian courtrooms. The discussions reveal that arguments in opposition to cameras are largely unfounded and in contradiction to the freedom of expression guarantee. The denial of the right is in reality based on judges' and lawyers' fear of loss of control of the courtroom environment. Cameras should only be banned from courtrooms as part of a total publication ban, and then only after a careful s. 1 analysis
The Judicial Independence Of Canadian Forces General Court Martials: An Analysis Of The Supreme Court Of Canada Judgment In R. V. Genereux, Michael Doi
Dalhousie Law Journal
In R. v. Genereux, the Supreme Court of Canada reviewed the structure of a Canadian Forces General Court Martial and found it to incorporate features which reasonably called its judicial independence into question. This was held to violate the rights of accused military personnel to a fair trial under sub-section 11(d) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. In arriving at this conclusion, the Supreme Court of Canada questioned the legitimacy of Canadian Forces provisions which structure a judicial process governing service personnel as separate and distinct members from the rest of the general population. The Court also reviewed …