The SCC's recent decision in Holland v. Saskatchewan, 2008 SCC 42 is not a surprising one; it falls in line with the established position in Canadian jurisprudence on governmental liability for negligence. (For a summary of the case, read TheCourt.ca's summary here.) The fact that the government can only be sued for "operational" negligence and […]
Mr. Holland is a game farmer and is also a class action representative who was trying to make fundamental changes to the relationship between the public and private spheres, as it pertains to splitting the burdens of ultra vires government action. In Holland v. Saskatchewan, 2008 SCC 42, one aspect to the statement of claim utilized […]
The Supreme Court of Israel is a unique judicial body. It is the highest court in Israel – the last resort for appeals in a three-tiered judicial system. However, sitting as a High Court of Justice it is also the court of first and last instance in petitions for judicial review of administrative action. And […]
The Supreme Court's recent decision in Keays v. Honda Canada, 2008 SCC 39, (summarized by Solomon Lam here) was a major victory for employers everywhere. In reducing both aggravated and punitive damages to zero, the Supreme Court of Canada has effectively deemed that Honda's conduct, while harmful, was not egregiously harmful. It is worth remembering […]
Both spent the better part of their lives in the limelight, and were recently adorned with the highest honor of the land. But among a transatlantic community of common roots, one courted controversy and faced government persecution, while the other wallowed in constant public praise and state adoration. This month, Canadian physician and abortion advocate […]
One week after handing down R. v. Devine, 2008 SCC 36, the Supreme Court released its judgment in R. v. Blackman 2008 SCC 37. In both cases, the court unanimously allowed hearsay evidence under the principled exception to hearsay rule. Taken in tandem, Devine (which was canvassed on this blog by Christopher Bird, here and […]
Canada's Supreme Courts' selection process has been criticized in recent years for being absolutist and undemocratict. This criticism lies, at least in part, in the fact that Canadians have as their close comparison for matters judicial the United States, whose well-known Supreme Court judicial appointment process causes a media firestorm every time a seat becomes […]
Last Friday the Supreme Court handed down its ruling on Honda v. Kevin Keays, 2008 SCC 39. Considered a watershed employment law case, Keays had no less than nine intervenors and has been the subject of much attention in both the legal community and the media. TheCourt.ca contributor Michael Lynk provided a useful analysis of […]
Handed down on June 27, 2008, R. v. Kapp, 2008 SCC 41, involves the interplay between sections 15 and 25 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, specifically in the context of Aboriginal fishing rights. This brief commentary asserts that Kapp goes further than simply upholding Aboriginal fishing rights. In fact, the ruling provides […]
The Kapp (2008 SCC 41) ruling offers the most important addition to s.15 jurisprudence since the Law ([1999] 1 S.C.R. 497) decision of 1999. After a number of years of silently enduring an academic onslaught, the Court has engaged with the barrage of scholarly criticism directed at the Law test (see footnotes 1 and 2) […]