This post was originally published on the Blog maintained by the Faculty of Law at the University of Alberta. It is reproduced here with permission. Last week's decision in Design Services Ltd. v. Canada , 2008 SCC 22 marks something of a coming-of-age for the Supreme Court of Canada in its handling of claims for […]
When Mildred Loving died on May 2nd, she left behind one of the landmark cases in 20th-century common law. Loving v. Virginia 388 U.S. 1 affirmed the Equal Protection Clause contained within the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution, and struck a blow against bigotry and legally enshrined racism. Beyond its importance in the […]
A little over a month ago, the Supreme Court ruled on the use of prior consistent statements to dispel allegations of fabricated testimony, in R. v. Stirling [2008] SCC 10. The Supreme Court's latest decision, R. v. Dinardo 2008 SCC 24 revisits the issue of prior consistent statements. Among other things, Dinardo considers some of […]
A central objective and guiding principle in Canadian immigration policy has been the management of migration flows. At the core is a balance between two broad interests; state sovereignty and security versus the basic human right to mobility and to shelter from persecution. While the first set of interests has historically dominated in Canadian immigration […]
The Chilean Constitutional Court held, in a 5-4 decision, that the emergency contraceptive pill (the so-called "morning after pill") was contrary to the right to life recognized in the Chilean Constitution. Some insight into the political backdrop of this case will assist in understanding the controversy that the Court faced and decided. By early 2006, […]
On May 1st, the Supreme Court of Canada issued its decision in Evans v. Teamsters Local Union No. 31, 2008 SCC 20 clarifying treatment of the issue of mitigation in employment law. With this decision, it has markedly altered the treatment of breach of employment contract in a manner that profoundly disadvantages wrongfully dismissed employees, […]
Although the recent pair of Supreme Court decisions regarding drug-sniffing dogs have (understandably) been attracting most of the attention, the Supreme Court last week handed down its decision in R. v. Mathieu, 2008 SCC 21, which is worth at least a brief note given its potential impact on sentencing. R. v. Mathieu is actually a […]
In Quebec, the most closely watched Supreme Court of Canada case of 2008 may well be that of Ministre de l’Éducation, du Loisir et du Sport, et al. v. Hong Ha Nguyen, et al. (“Quebec v. Nguyen”, Supreme Court of Canada docket number 32229, [2007] S.C.C.A. No. 431). A constitutional question should be stated within […]
This past Thursday marked the conclusion of Donald Evans' five year struggle to obtain damages for his wrongful dismissal from the Teamsters Local Union No. 31, Evans' employer of 23 years. In Evans v. Teamsters Local Union No. 31, 2008 SCC 20, a majority of the Supreme Court sided with both the Teamsters and the […]
Last Friday the Supreme Court of Canada released judgments in a pair of cases involving the use of drug sniffing dogs by police: R. v. Kang-Brown, 2008 SCC 18 and R. v. A.M., 2008 SCC 19. These decisions received considerable media attention, mostly for what they had to say about the constitutionality of police employing […]