Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Folk Hero Or Legal Pariah? A Comment On The Legal Ethics Of Edgar Schmidt And Schmidt V Canada (Attorney General), Andrew Flavelle Martin
Folk Hero Or Legal Pariah? A Comment On The Legal Ethics Of Edgar Schmidt And Schmidt V Canada (Attorney General), Andrew Flavelle Martin
Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press
In Schmidt v Canada (Attorney General), government lawyer Edgar Schmidt sought a declaration that the Department of Justice and the Minister of Justice were misinterpreting legislation requiring the Minister to inform the House of Commons if government bills are inconsistent with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Schmidt was one of the lawyers who made recommendations under that legislation. Schmidt thus presents an unusual case study in legal ethics: what should, or can, a lawyer do when a client rejects the lawyer’s advice? What if the client is the government, and the advice is about fundamental rights? This …
The Attorney General's Forgotten Role As Legal Advisor To The Legislature: A Comment On Schmidt V Canada (Attorney General), Andrew Martin
The Attorney General's Forgotten Role As Legal Advisor To The Legislature: A Comment On Schmidt V Canada (Attorney General), Andrew Martin
Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press
In Schmidt v Canada (Attorney General), the Federal Court of Appeal interpreted a series of provisions requiring the Minister of Justice to inform the House of Commons if government bills or proposed regulations are “inconsistent with” the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms or the Canadian Bill of Rights. The Federal Court of Appeal, like the Federal Court below, held that these provisions are triggered only where there is no credible argument for consistency. In doing so, both Courts relied, in part, on a separation of powers argument. They stated that the Minister of Justice and Attorney General is not …
A Test For Freedom Of Conscience Under The Canadian Charter Of Rights And Freedoms: Regulating And Litigating Conscientious Refusals In Health Care, Jocelyn Downie, Francoise Baylis
A Test For Freedom Of Conscience Under The Canadian Charter Of Rights And Freedoms: Regulating And Litigating Conscientious Refusals In Health Care, Jocelyn Downie, Francoise Baylis
Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press
Conscientious refusal to provide insured health care services is a significant point of controversy in Canada, especially in reproductive medicine and end-of-life care. Some provincial and territorial legislatures have developed legislation or regulations, and some professional regulatory bodies have developed policies or guidelines, to better reconcile tensions between health care professionals’ conscience and patients’ access to health care services. As other groups attempt to draft standards and as challenges to existing standards head to court, the fact that the meaning of “freedom of conscience” under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is not yet settled will become ever more …