Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
Minority Shareholder Rights In Canada And England: 1860-1987, Jeffrey G. Macintosh
Minority Shareholder Rights In Canada And England: 1860-1987, Jeffrey G. Macintosh
Osgoode Hall Law Journal
This article reviews the changing relationship between majority and minority shareholders over approximately the past century and a quarter. In the last century and the early part of this century, company law in Canada and England was built on a foundation of majoritarianism, which was sometimes applied over-zealously by the courts to the detriment of minority shareholders. This majoritarianism has slowly yielded over time, however, to a greater concern for the position of minority shareholders. It is still not clear if controlling shareholders owe fiduciary duties at common law either to the company or to other shareholders. However, the courts …
The New Fordism In Canada: Capital's Offensive, Labour's Opportunity, Daniel Drache, Harry J. Glasbeek
The New Fordism In Canada: Capital's Offensive, Labour's Opportunity, Daniel Drache, Harry J. Glasbeek
Osgoode Hall Law Journal
The breakdown in the links of mass production and mass consumption poses problems throughout the advanced industrial world. In each nation-state the ensuing struggles will take different forms. In postwar Canada, the link between mass consumption and mass production did not lead to the same kind of trade union participation in decision-making as it did in much of Europe. Workers were unable to establish embedded rights of worker participation. What was known as the fordist model in Europe did not have deep roots in Canada. Canadian workers are now being attacked by employers whose bargaining powers were never seriously blunted, …
Shop Talk: Conversations About The Constitutionality Of Our Labor Law, David M. Beatty
Shop Talk: Conversations About The Constitutionality Of Our Labor Law, David M. Beatty
Osgoode Hall Law Journal
In this essay Professor Beatty joins the debate as to how, if at all, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the process of judicial review can be integrated with our tradition of democratic rule and the sovereignty of the popular will. Rather than deal directly with the arguments of those who are critical of the entrenchment of a written bill of rights, Professor Beatty endeavors to cast the Charter and the new role of the judges in the best possible light. Analogizing the process of constitutional review to "conversations of justification" (using examples drawn from the labour law field), …
Diagnostic Adjudication In Appellate Courts: The Supreme Court Of Canada And The Charter Of Rights, Carl Baar, Ellen Baar
Diagnostic Adjudication In Appellate Courts: The Supreme Court Of Canada And The Charter Of Rights, Carl Baar, Ellen Baar
Osgoode Hall Law Journal
Three distinct adjudicatory processes are found in appellate courts: decisional adjudication (applying principles), procedural adjudication (choosing among principles), and diagnostic adjudication (defining and developing principles). The Supreme Court of Canada has traditionally used procedural adjudication, in which the adversary process frames issues and generates supporting material. However, the Court's decreased caseload, its increased discretion to select cases, and the arrival of a new wave of issues under the Charter of Rights has shifted the Court's work to diagnostic adjudication. As judgment becomes less a choice problem and more a creative exercise, both the degree and kind of judicial involvement changes. …
Constitutional Arguments: Interpretation And Legitimacy In Canadian Constitutional Thought, Joel C. Bakan
Constitutional Arguments: Interpretation And Legitimacy In Canadian Constitutional Thought, Joel C. Bakan
Osgoode Hall Law Journal
The author provides an analysis and critique of the various types of arguments advanced by Canadian constitutional jurists to establish formal grounds for the legitimacy of judicial review under the Canadian constitution. He demonstrates how two variables - constitutional truth and trust in the judiciary - are relied upon in past and contemporary debates about constitutional adjudication to construct four different types of argument about the legitimacy of judicial review. Each of these types of argument is then criticized in the context of recent Charter decisions. It is argued that none of them can sustain the burden of legitimating judicial …