Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Schulich School of Law, Dalhousie University

Journal

2011

Supreme Court of Canada

Articles 1 - 7 of 7

Full-Text Articles in Law

"Academic Concerns"-Caring About Conversation In Canadian Common Law, Karen Crawley, Shauna Van Praagh Oct 2011

"Academic Concerns"-Caring About Conversation In Canadian Common Law, Karen Crawley, Shauna Van Praagh

Dalhousie Law Journal

The Supreme Court of Canada, in its 2001 decision in Cooper v Hobart, refined the test in Canadian common law for establishing a duty of care in the tort of negligence. Although aware of the complexities and ongoing challenges of the "duty of care" concept, the Supreme Court openly labelled these concerns as "academic." This article confirms these concerns as "academic," but insists that this label underlines their centrality not only to an understanding of the tort of negligence but to the nature and form of common law reasoning. By pointing to errors in the Supreme Court of Canada's judgment-errors …


Collective Bargaining In The Shadow Of The Charter Cathedral: Union Strategies In A Post B.C. Health World, Michael Macneil Apr 2011

Collective Bargaining In The Shadow Of The Charter Cathedral: Union Strategies In A Post B.C. Health World, Michael Macneil

Dalhousie Law Journal

For the first twenty-five years after the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms was enacted, it appeared that it would have little impact on Canadian labour laws. The Supreme Court of Canada took the view that the guarantee of freedom of association in the Charter did not include a right to strike and did notprovide protection for collective bargaining. Common law rules regulating picketing did not come within the scope of the Charter's rules on freedom of expression. Academic commentators were divided on whether this was a good or a bad thing, some espousing the hope that the Charter could …


Wrongful Termination Claims In The Supreme Court Of Canada: Coming Up Short, Dianne Pothier Apr 2011

Wrongful Termination Claims In The Supreme Court Of Canada: Coming Up Short, Dianne Pothier

Dalhousie Law Journal

The author concludes that the Supreme Court of Canada's narrow interpretations in Wal-Mart and Honda undermine the purposes of collective bargaining and human rights legislation, respectively Wal-Mart involves an unfair labour practice complaint following the closing of a store in Jonquibre, Quebec. The author contests the analysis of the Supreme Court of Canada, as being far removed from the context of the real difficulties in dealing with determined anti-union employers, instead facilitating statutory evasion. Honda involves a claim for wrongful dismissal, where the issue at the Supreme Court of Canada level is one of remedy, premised on the dismissal amounting …


Sharing The Spotlight: Co-Authored Reasons On The Modern Supreme Court Of Canada, Peter J. Maccormick Apr 2011

Sharing The Spotlight: Co-Authored Reasons On The Modern Supreme Court Of Canada, Peter J. Maccormick

Dalhousie Law Journal

When the Supreme Court of Canada delivers its reasons forjudgment, the normal expectation (the rare "By the Court" decision aside) is that the judgment of the Court-unanimous or majority or even plurality-will be designated as having been delivered by one specific judge. ("The reasons of A, B, C and D were delivered by B.") But in recent decades, the practice has developed for two or more judges to share this formal designation; co-authorships currently account for one judgment (and, for that matter one set of minority reasons) in every ten. This article explores this practice, unusual among comparable national high …


Non-Majority Union Representation Conforms To Ilo Freedom Of Association Principles And (Potentially) Promotes Inter-Union Collaboration: New Zealand Lessons For Canada, Mark Harcourt, Helen Lam Apr 2011

Non-Majority Union Representation Conforms To Ilo Freedom Of Association Principles And (Potentially) Promotes Inter-Union Collaboration: New Zealand Lessons For Canada, Mark Harcourt, Helen Lam

Dalhousie Law Journal

North American union certification violates workers' freedom of association, a fundamental human right well established by the International Labour Organization (ILO); by denying workers the right to be represented when a majority of their co-workers does not favour a union. In Canada, the Supreme Court has drawn on ILO standards to recognize a constitutional right to bargain collectively and organize as part of freedom of association under section 2(d) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. However, such recognition of the ILO principles has, as yet, to translate into legislation that would provide non-exclusive, non-majority union representation, at least in …


Employee Pension Rights And The False Promise Of Trust Law, Elizabeth Shilton Apr 2011

Employee Pension Rights And The False Promise Of Trust Law, Elizabeth Shilton

Dalhousie Law Journal

This article explores the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court of Canada on employment pension trusts. I argue that the Court's 1994 decision in Schmidt v. Air Products, which embraced trust law as a tool for resolving pension surplus ownership disputes, held out the promise that courts would use fiduciary principles to shape pension rights for employees and protect those rights against employer self-interest. That promise has failed to bear much fruit. Since Schmidt, the Court has moved away from a conception of trust law as a fetter on employer power towards a flexible conception in which employer trust obligations are …


Why The Right-Freedom Distinction Matters To Labour Lawyers-And To All Canadians, Brian Langille Apr 2011

Why The Right-Freedom Distinction Matters To Labour Lawyers-And To All Canadians, Brian Langille

Dalhousie Law Journal

This lecture is about very basic legal ideas such as rights, freedoms, and the distinction between them. It makes the argument that clear thinking about these basic ideas is required and that when these ideas are neglected we have a recipe for real legal confusion. More than that, a failure to attend to these basic concepts and their relationship can produce, as it has in recent Supreme Court of Canada Charter cases on "Freedom of Association," a real threat to the fundamental freedoms of all Canadians