Students may write this examination for 100% of the final grade.  The exam is due on Sunday, November 28 (unless other arrangements are made with the course director) and may be filed by email.

Answer both of the following questions.  Each question should be answered with an essay of no more than 2,500 words in length (10 pages double-spaced).

1.  Write a creative piece on one either (a) or (b):

 a)  Think of a situation in which it might have been useful for you to have had a more extensive background in political theory as it relates to administrative law, as you now have.  Explain how that theoretical background might have helped you.

 b)  You have been asked to give an after-dinner speech to the Administrative Law Section of the Canadian Bar Association on the following topic:  "Nothing is more practical than theory."  Write your speech.  Make reference to relevant readings in this course.

2.  Imagine that as a result of unique and extraordinary set of political events, you have recently become the tenth judge on the Supreme Court of Canada.  Write either a separate concurring, or dissenting opinion for one of the following recent cases:

     Monsanto Canada Inc. v. Ontario (Superintendent of Financial Services), Neutral citation: 2004 SCC 54.  File No.:  29586.

     Finney v. Barreau du Québec, Neutral Citation: 2004 SCC 36, File No.: 29344.

     Congrégation des témoins de Jéhovah de St-Jérôme-Lafontaine v. Lafontaine (Village) Neutral citation:  2004 SCC 48, File No.:  29507.

(These decisions can be downloaded through the internet address:  http://www.lexum.umontreal.ca/csc-scc/en/index.html).

Make a great deal more use of more references to relevant political, administrative and legal theory to back up your opinion than did your colleagues on the Supreme Court.  Be imaginative and creative.