Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
A Step Too Far - Posthumously Conceived Children And Social Security Entitlements In Vernoff V Astrue, Mel Cousins
A Step Too Far - Posthumously Conceived Children And Social Security Entitlements In Vernoff V Astrue, Mel Cousins
Mel Cousins
This case note examines a recent decision of the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit concerning the entitlements of posthumously conceived children under social security. In contrast to its earlier (expansionary) decision in Gillett-Netting, here the Court set out the limits to how far it is willing to push the interpretation of the (convoluted) legislation and refused to find a right to benefit where there was no evidence that the father had consented to (or even considered) having a child post-mortem.
Age Discrimination And Social Benefits: The Long Retreat From Tétreault-Gadoury?, Mel Cousins
Age Discrimination And Social Benefits: The Long Retreat From Tétreault-Gadoury?, Mel Cousins
Mel Cousins
This case note looks at a number of recent decisions of the Canadian courts concerning age discrimination as it applies to social benefits.
Homelessness And The Charter Of Rights, Mel Cousins
Homelessness And The Charter Of Rights, Mel Cousins
Mel Cousins
There have, to date, been relatively few cases concerning homelessness and the Canadian Charter of Rights. Yet the rights set out in the Charter, such as the right to freedom of expression (s. 2(b), the right to life, liberty and the security of person (s. 7) and equality rights (s. 15) should all play an important role in protecting the position of a disadvantaged group such as the homeless. This article looks at some of the main cases concerning homelessness and the Charter (part I). It then goes on to look at the constitutional case law of the United States …
‘A Recommitment To The Idea Of Substantive Equality’ (Or Not)? S. 15(1) Of The Charter Of Rights After Kapp: Harris V Canada (Human Resources And Skills Development), Mel Cousins
Mel Cousins
This note looks at the decision of the Federal Court of Appeal in Harris – a case which raised important equality issues about the operation of the ‘drop out’ provisions in the Canadian Pension Plan. The case is interesting both for the issue itself but also because it is one of the first judgments to consider the impact of the Supreme Court’s restatement in Kapp of its approach to s. 15. However, the court of appeal was split with all three judges giving a different analysis of the issues (albeit that the claim was rejected on a split decision). Part …