Justice Cromwell Gets Candid See Pg

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Justice Cromwell Gets Candid See Pg JANUARY 2017 RETIRED SCC JUSTICE CROMWELL GETS CANDID SEE PG. 18 MORE JUDICIAL NEWS SEE PG. 20 ALUMNA AND PROFESSOR HELP STRENGTHEN JUSTICE FOR INTERNATIONAL CRIMES SEE PG. 8 ALUMNI CELEBRATE QUEEN’S LAW AT FALL RECEPTIONS SEE PG. 56 REMEMBERING FORMER DEAN’S COUNCIL VICE-CHAIR, STEPHEN SIGURDSON, LAW’84 SEE PG. 34 INTRODUCTION ALUMNI/STUDENT INDEX DEAN’S COUNCIL MEMBERS Class of ’66 Class of ’90 Class of ’10 Sheila A. Murray, Law’82 (Com’79) Governor General David Robert Emblem…60 Patrick Welsh…5 Chair Johnston…30, 31 David Kerzner (PhD ’15)…33 Staying in Touch President and General Counsel Class of ’12 CI Financial Corp. Class of ’70 Class of ’91 Brianna Guenther…64-65 Queen’s Law Reports Online George Windsor…56 David Allgood, Law’74 (Arts’70) Priscilla Ferrazzi (LLM’07)…38 Kevin Guenther…64-65 is a periodic electronic update of Past Chair How are we doing so far? Counsel Queen’s Law Reports magazine Class of ’71 Class of ’92 Class of ’13 Dentons Canada LLP published by David Pattenden…35 Marie Beyette…42 Karla McGrath (LLM)…16 Sunita Doobay…42 Laura Sigurdsson…34 Betty DelBianco, Law’84 QUEEN’S FACULTY OF LAW Class of ’72 Pam MacEachern…28 Executive VP, Chief Legal & Administrative Officer MARKETING AND COMMUNICATIONS and Corporate Secretary Michel Picher…30-31 Jana Mills…17 Class of ’14 Matt Shepherd, Director Celestica Inc. Justice David Wake…24-25 Douglass Dawson…5 Macdonald Hall Class of ’93 Brandon Kerstens…5 Queen’s University Janet Fuhrer, Law’85 Class of ’76 Ida Bianchi…28 Partner Kingston ON Canada K7L 3N6 Justice Thomas Cromwell Gary Clarke…65 Class of ’15 Ridout & Maybee LLP law.queensu.ca …18-19, 22 Professor Arthur Cockfield Rachel Eichholtz…11 Peter Griffin, Law’77 Editor …33, 43 Managing Partner, Toronto Office Lisa Graham, Com’88, Artsci’92, MPA’08 Class of ‘77 Barbara Johnston…64 Class of ’16 Lenczner Slaght Royce Smith Griffin LLP Manager of Communications Dave McInnis…68 Sean Kearney…28 Nancy Brar…11 In 2016, Queen’s Law produced three types Thomas A. Houston, Law’78 (Com’75) Tel: 613.533.6000, ext. 74259 Lucy McSweeney…28 James Clinton…5 Managing Partner, Ottawa Office Fax: 613.533.6611 Class of ’78 Fiona Sampson…28, 31 William McDiarmid…12-13 of magazines: Dentons Canada LLP Email: [email protected] Laurie McInnis…68-69 Class of ’94 Class of ’17 Kelley McKinnon, Law’88 (Artsci’85) Contributors Class of ’79 Joe Bradford…64 Brody Appotive…54 Partner and Head of Securities Litigation Practice Emily Lieffers, Law’16 Greg Richards…14–15 • Queen’s Law Reports (print); Gowling WLG (Canada) LLP Cidalia Faria…28 Mark Asfar…55 Kirsteen MacLeod Sarah Black…51 • Three Queen’s Law Reports Online (digital); James M. Parks, Law’71 Anthony Pugh Class of ’80 Class of ‘95 Alice Colquhoun…22 • The new Supporting Excellence (print). Counsel Jeremy Mutton, Law’19 Justice Harvey Martin Masse…56 Katie Ling…52-53 Gardiner Roberts LLP Dirk Rodenburg Brownstone…52–53 Graeme Macpherson…54 Justice Jo’Anne Strekaf…26–27 David Sharpe, Law’95 Class of ’96 Geneve Say…54 Design + Production President and Chief Operating Officer Brigadier-General Ken Watkin Jayne Stoyles…8–9 Kate Withers…46-47 We would like your feedback! Bridging Finance Inc. Base design: (LLM ’90)…32 Larry Harris, Queen’s University Marketing Class of ’01 Class of ’18 Production and layout: R. Paul Steep, Law’80 (Artsci’77) Class of ’81 Sean Ellacott…10–11 Erin Keogh…54 VP and Chief Compliance OfficerBMO You can take a short one-question survey, and Sarah Spriggs, Spriggs Design Susan Charlesworth…12–13 Capital Markets Kathy Ferreira…10-11 Olga Michtchouk…12-13 then choose whether to take a longer survey that Jill Whitehead…54 Patrice Walch-Watson, Law’91 Class of ’82 Class of ’02 addresses them in detail. If you complete the Senior Managing Director, General Counsel & Sheila Murray…39 Andrea Boctor…40-41 Class of ’19 Corporate Secretary Kevin Bailie…50-51 Canada Pension Plan Investment Board longer survey (up to 15 minutes), you can enter a Class of ’83 Class of ’04 Daniel Baum…7 draw for one of three toque-and- scarf bundles. Frank E. Walwyn, Law’93 Ken Cuthbertson…36–37 Kate Crawford…40-41 Zac Cooper…7 Partner Justice Dame Ellen France (LLM) Claire Davis…46-47 Survey closes on January 30. WeirFoulds LLP … 20-21 Class of ’05 Jennifer Mak…7 Simon France (LLM)…20 Jonathan Goode…44-45 Josh Sherkin …7 Alan Whyte, Law’79 (Artsci’76) Partner Imram Hussainaly…68–69 Diane Wu…7 Take Survey Now! Cunningham, Swan, Carty, Little & Bonham LLP Class of ’84 Trevor Shaw…28 Leslie Sigurdson…34 PhD Candidates Stephen Sigurdson…34 Class of ’09 Ana Patricia Chuc Gamboa…48 Justice David Stratas…28 Major Dylan Kerr…57 Maseeh Haseeb…49 Paul Quick…10–11 ON THE COVER: Justice Thomas Cromwell, Law’76, LLD’10 (Mus’73), participated in a Q&A during his visit to Queen’s Law in November. (Photo by Andrew Van Overbeke) JANUARY 2017 - 1 SCHOOL NEWS Professor Darryl Robinson Queen’s Law offers new undergraduate ‘Certificate in Law’ GREG BLACK GREG Queen’s professor receives $91K grant to research Queen’s Law has launched one of the first academic “With the knowledge provided by the Certificate, programs specifically directed at undergraduate students will be able to bring a level of legal literacy contemporary crimes against humanity students to be offered, and taught, directly by a to the workplace that can distinguish them and open law faculty. doors for them professionally. Professor Darryl Robinson helped draft the current is the diverse range of human organizations that can The program, the Queen’s Certificate in Law, is “For example, engineering and commerce students, leading definition of crimes against humanity. Now unleash widespread violence against civilians. available to undergraduates at Queen’s and, as a fully especially those seeking to pursue careers in entre- he wants to modernize this area of law to deal with Instead of focusing solely on cases from interna- online program accessible through eCampus Ontario, preneurship, would benefit from both Corporate contemporary non-state actors, such as terrorist tional tribunals, Robinson will look closely at national to undergraduates in universities and colleges across and Workplace Law. Engineering students, particu- groups or corporations. A $91,000 research grant from cases from jurisdictions in Latin America, Africa, Ontario and Canada. larly those involved in resource development, would the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council Europe and Asia. “Everyone is using the international Designed to introduce undergraduate students to benefit from Aboriginal Law. Students with an interest (SSHRC) will help him do just that. cases. What I have found is that many national courts the study of law, the program builds on the success of in human resources would benefit from a course “Situations of mass atrocity, such as in Syria and have had to think about crimes about humanity and LAW-201: Introduction to Canadian Law, and includes offering a focus on contemporary Workplace Law.” Iraq, currently threaten thousands of human beings they have come up with some very helpful insights.” courses dealing with some of the most important “It’s not just the topic areas themselves, however, and have dislocated millions,” says Robinson. “Pros- For his research, the majority of his grant funds are issues in contemporary society: Aboriginal Law, that will make these courses of interest to students,” ecutions for crimes against humanity are part of the being used to hire JD and PhD students as research Workplace Law and Corporate Law. The 12-credit says Associate Dean Cherie Metcalf, Law’01. “We’ve world’s response. Unfortunately, the law is currently assistants to aid in the project. “This is crucial because program will provide students with a comprehen- really focused on making the structure and content of in a state of confusion. The precedents are sparse, cases from foreign jurisdictions are difficult to access sive overview of each target area of law from a range the courses as engaging as possible, whether students so judges are struggling to fill in gaps. Some of their and search.” Students are also helping to make the of perspectives, the opportunity to learn and apply are taking them on-campus or online. We’ve integrated impressionistic tests have led to the collapse of merito- research data and main findings available on the the basic concepts of legal reasoning, evaluate fact student inquiry and case-based activities that focus on rious cases for terrible atrocities.” “Legal Tools” Database, a tool now accessed by several scenarios, and develop and justify a legal position. diverse perspectives and real-life issues. The major doctrinal disputes today actually reflect thousand lawyers in all regions of the world. “We’re tremendously excited to be offering this “Longer term, depending on student interest and competing intuitions about the crime, he argues. “By In addition, the money will be used to interview new undergraduate Certificate in Law,” says Dean demand, we see the opportunity to expand the courses laying bare the underlying theories, we can develop national and international prosecutors about chal- Bill Flanagan. “LAW-201, our flagship undergraduate being offered as part of the Certificate, including interpretations that are conceptually coherent, legally lenging cases. “As much as academics try to come course, has been a hit with Queen’s students, both Constitutional and Public Law, Intellectual Property grounded and practically effective.” up with difficult hypotheticals to test ideas,” says on-campus and online. When we asked undergraduate Law, Health Care Law, Criminal Justice, Immigra- In this vein, Robinson has submitted amicus briefs Robinson, “the most perplexing and unforeseen students if they wanted us to offer additional courses tion Law, Family Law and International Law.
Recommended publications
  • COURT JUSTICES, 1985-2013 Jean-Christophe Bédard-Rubin
    Paper prepared for the 2018 CPSA Annual Conference – Please do not cite nor circulate without permission HOW MUCH FRENCH DO THEY SPEAK ANYWAY? A BILINGUALISM INDEX FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICES, 1985-2013 Jean-Christophe Bédard-Rubin & Tiago Rubin Draft paper prepared for the CPSA 2018 Annual Conference. Please do not cite nor circulate without permission. Mandatory bilingualism for Supreme Court judges tantalizes Canadian politics for at least ten years now. The advocates of judicial bilingualism have repeatedly tried (and failed) to enshrine into law the requirement for Supreme Court justices to be functionally bilingual, i.e. the ability to “read materials and understand oral argument without the need for translation or interpretation in French and English”. For them, integrating mandatory bilingualism as a legislative requirement in the appointment process is a panacea. Their opponents argue that language proficiency in French should not be a sine qua non condition for Supreme Court justiceship and that requiring it would prevent excellent candidates from being appointed. However, despite the fact that empirical statements abound on both sides, there is very little empirical evidence regarding the actual impact of unilingualism and bilingualism on Canadian judicial institutions and simply no evidence whatsoever about its impact on individual judges’ behavior. Building on our ongoing research on judicial bilingualism, in this paper we try to evaluate the level of bilingualism of individual justices. What our findings suggest is that the behavior of Francophone and Anglophone bilinguals is influenced by the linguistic competency of their colleagues. Our findings also suggest that some Anglophone justices that are deemed to be bilinguals do not behave very differently from their unilingual colleagues.
    [Show full text]
  • CCCC Attended Supreme Court of Canada Hearing on the Aga Case
    Table of Contents • CCCC attended Supreme Court of Canada hearing on the Aga case CCCC attended Supreme Court of Canada hearing on the Aga case Analysis of current issues involving law, religion, and society, led by Barry W. Bussey, Director of Legal Affairs. By Barry W. Bussey CCCC (09.12.2020) - https://bit.ly/3nlGTQl - CCCC’s Director of Legal Affairs, Barry W. Bussey, represented the CCCC at the Supreme Court of Canada’s virtual hearing today (Dec 9) in the case of Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church of Canada St. Mary Cathedral, et al. v. Teshome Aga, (39094). CCCC was granted the opportunity to intervene in the case, and to file a brief, but was not given time for oral argument. Brief fact summary Several members of the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church St. Mary Cathedral were on a committee that investigated a movement within the congregation. The committee reported to Archbishop Dimetros that the movement was heretical. The committee recommended action, including purging of heretics. When Archbishop Dimetros did not follow their recommendations, the committee members were robust in their opposition – to the point that they were warned of church discipline. Finally, they were suspended from membership. In response, they then sued in court. The church in return asked for summary judgment to dismiss the lawsuit. The Ontario Superior Court of Justice agreed with the church and dismissed the disgruntled members’ lawsuit, noting that the courts have no jurisdiction to hear such cases. However, the members appealed to the Ontario Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal stated that courts could hear the case because there was a contract between the members and the church.
    [Show full text]
  • Special Series on the Federal Dimensions of Reforming the Supreme Court of Canada
    SPECIAL SERIES ON THE FEDERAL DIMENSIONS OF REFORMING THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA The Supreme Court of Canada: A Chronology of Change Jonathan Aiello Institute of Intergovernmental Relations School of Policy Studies, Queen’s University SC Working Paper 2011 21 May 1869 Intent on there being a final court of appeal in Canada following the Bill for creation of a Supreme country’s inception in 1867, John A. Macdonald, along with Court is withdrawn statesmen Télesphore Fournier, Alexander Mackenzie and Edward Blake propose a bill to establish the Supreme Court of Canada. However, the bill is withdrawn due to staunch support for the existing system under which disappointed litigants could appeal the decisions of Canadian courts to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC) sitting in London. 18 March 1870 A second attempt at establishing a final court of appeal is again Second bill for creation of a thwarted by traditionalists and Conservative members of Parliament Supreme Court is withdrawn from Quebec, although this time the bill passed first reading in the House. 8 April 1875 The third attempt is successful, thanks largely to the efforts of the Third bill for creation of a same leaders - John A. Macdonald, Télesphore Fournier, Alexander Supreme Court passes Mackenzie and Edward Blake. Governor General Sir O’Grady Haly gives the Supreme Court Act royal assent on September 17th. 30 September 1875 The Honourable William Johnstone Ritchie, Samuel Henry Strong, The first five puisne justices Jean-Thomas Taschereau, Télesphore Fournier, and William are appointed to the Court Alexander Henry are appointed puisne judges to the Supreme Court of Canada.
    [Show full text]
  • Carissima Mathen*
    C h o ic es a n d C o n t r o v e r sy : J udic ia l A ppointments in C a n a d a Carissima Mathen* P a r t I What do judges do? As an empirical matter, judges settle disputes. They act as a check on both the executive and legislative branches. They vindicate human rights and civil liberties. They arbitrate jurisdictional conflicts. They disagree. They bicker. They change their minds. In a normative sense, what judges “do” depends very much on one’s views of judging. If one thinks that judging is properly confined to the law’s “four comers”, then judges act as neutral, passive recipients of opinions and arguments about that law.1 They consider arguments, examine text, and render decisions that best honour the law that has been made. If judging also involves analysis of a society’s core (if implicit) political agreements—and the degree to which state laws or actions honour those agreements—then judges are critical players in the mechanisms through which such agreement is tested. In post-war Canada, the judiciary clearly has taken on the second role as well as the first. Year after year, judges are drawn into disputes over the very values of our society, a trend that shows no signs of abating.2 In view of judges’ continuing power, and the lack of political appetite to increase control over them (at least in Canada), it is natural that attention has turned to the process by which persons are nominated and ultimately appointed to the bench.
    [Show full text]
  • For Immediate Release – June 19, 2020 the ADVOCATES' SOCIETY
    For immediate release – June 19, 2020 THE ADVOCATES’ SOCIETY ESTABLISHES THE MODERN ADVOCACY TASK FORCE The Advocates’ Society has established a Modern Advocacy Task Force to make recommendations for the reform of the Canadian justice system. The recommendations of the Task Force will seek to combine the best measures by which Canadian courts have adapted to the COVID-19 pandemic with other measures designed to ensure meaningful and substantive access to justice for the long term. The Advocates’ Society believes that permanent changes to our justice system require careful research, analysis, consultation, and deliberation. “This is a pivotal moment for the Canadian justice system,” said Guy Pratte, incoming President of The Advocates’ Society. “There is no doubt that we are learning a great deal from the changes to the system brought about by necessity during this crisis. We have a unique opportunity to reflect on this experience and use it to enhance the efficiency and quality of the justice system. We must do that while preserving the fundamental right of litigants to have their cases put forward in a meaningful and direct way before courts and other decision-makers.” The Task Force is composed of members of The Advocates’ Society from across the country. They will be guided by an advisory panel of some of the most respected jurists and counsel in our country. The Task Force’s mandate is to provide insight and analysis to assist in the modernization of the justice system. It will be informed by experience, jurisprudence and Canadian societal norms. The Task Force will offer recommendations designed to ensure that the Canadian legal system provides a sustainable, accessible and transparent system of justice in which litigants and the public have confidence.
    [Show full text]
  • Reforming the Supreme Court Appointment Process, 2004-2014: a 10-Year Democratic Audit 2014 Canliidocs 33319 Adam M
    The Supreme Court Law Review: Osgoode’s Annual Constitutional Cases Conference Volume 67 (2014) Article 4 Reforming the Supreme Court Appointment Process, 2004-2014: A 10-Year Democratic Audit 2014 CanLIIDocs 33319 Adam M. Dodek Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/sclr This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License. Citation Information Dodek, Adam M.. "Reforming the Supreme Court Appointment Process, 2004-2014: A 10-Year Democratic Audit." The Supreme Court Law Review: Osgoode’s Annual Constitutional Cases Conference 67. (2014). http://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/sclr/vol67/iss1/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Osgoode Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in The uS preme Court Law Review: Osgoode’s Annual Constitutional Cases Conference by an authorized editor of Osgoode Digital Commons. Reforming the Supreme Court Appointment Process, 2004-2014: A 10-Year Democratic Audit* Adam M. Dodek** 2014 CanLIIDocs 33319 The way in which Justice Rothstein was appointed marks an historic change in how we appoint judges in this country. It brought unprecedented openness and accountability to the process. The hearings allowed Canadians to get to know Justice Rothstein through their members of Parliament in a way that was not previously possible.1 — The Rt. Hon. Stephen Harper, PC [J]udicial appointments … [are] a critical part of the administration of justice in Canada … This is a legacy issue, and it will live on long after those who have the temporary stewardship of this position are no longer there.
    [Show full text]
  • “Canada” on the Supreme Court in 2016
    DRAFT | CPSA 2017 Please don’t cite without permission Competing Diversities: Representing “Canada” on the Supreme Court in 2016 Erin Crandall | Acadia University Robert Schertzer | University of Toronto The Supreme Court oF Canada’s (SCC) inFluence on politics and public policy – from deciding human rights cases to adjudicating Federal-provincial disputes – has long placed it in the spotlight oF political actors and watchers alike. Seeing the Court as activist or restrained, as siding with the Federal government or as balanced in its Federalism case law, as anti-democratic or the guardian oF the constitution, are all hallmarks oF the debate about its place in Canadian politics. Underpinning these debates is an often-critical focus on the justices’ themselves, the process by which they are selected, and the virtually unFettered power Prime Ministers have had in appointing individuals to the bench. In August 2016, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau clearly established his position within this debate by announcing a new way to choose SCC justices. Along with promoting more transparency and accountability in the process, the key elements oF Trudeau’s proposed reForms were to ensure that all future justices were functionally bilingual and that they represent the diversity of Canada (see Trudeau 2016b). In line with these new objectives, one oF the First things Trudeau highlighted in his announcement was a willingness to break with the convention of regional representation on the bench and move toward an open application process. With the upcoming retirement of Nova Scotia Justice Thomas Cromwell in September 2016, questions immediately emerged as to whether the government would deviate from the tradition of having one of the nine justices on the SCC come from Atlantic Canada.
    [Show full text]
  • Dispatches from the Energy Industry
    ALUMNI MAGAZINE WITHOUT PREJUDICE SPRING 2016 DISPATCHES FROM THE ENERGY INDUSTRY Thank you to Moodys Gartner LLP for your generous five-year, $100,000 gift in support of the Bowman National Tax Moot team and student research assistantships to aid faculty research in the area of taxation law. JENNY KHAKH Aspiring Mooter // Class 2018 DEAN’S MESSAGE Spring 2016 UAlberta Law ALUMNI MAGAZINE SPRING 2016 EDITOR Jill Rutherford elcome to the Spring 2016 issue of Without Prejudice, the University of ASSISTANT EDITOR WAlberta Faculty of Law alumni magazine. As alumni, you are members Gillian Reid of a community more than 100 years in the making; a community with a distinguished tradition of learning the law and engaging in public service ART DIRECTION AND DESIGN – locally, nationally, and internationally. In this issue, we look back on the Backstreet Communications year that was to celebrate the many accomplishments of our faculty, staff, CONTRIBUTING WRITERS students, and alumni. Our cover story examines the challenges facing the Matthew Dolan, Jeff Kubik, Gillian Reid, energy industry, with commentary from professors David Percy, Q.C. and Jill Rutherford, Michael Swanberg Dr. Cameron Jefferies, as well as from distinguished alumni providing counsel or leading change in an industry critical to Alberta and Canada. Visit us online at The 2015-2016 academic year had many highlights – flip to the Year in www.lawschool.ualberta.ca and find us on: Review section to see a selection of photos – including the swearing in to the Supreme Court of Canada of The Honourable Mr. Justice Russell Brown; the promotion to full Professor of Cameron Hutchison and Vice Dean Moin Yahya; the announcement of three new Assistant Professors to the Faculty and two Visiting Without Prejudice is published annually Assistant Professors to increase our scholarly depth, strength, and diversity; by the Faculty of Law, with a circulation and a tremendously successful competitive moot season for our students.
    [Show full text]
  • Diversifying the Bar: Lawyers Make History Biographies of Early and Exceptional Ontario Lawyers of Diverse Communities Arran
    ■ Diversifying the bar: lawyers make history Biographies of Early and Exceptional Ontario Lawyers of Diverse Communities Arranged By Year Called to the Bar, Part 2: 1941 to the Present Click here to download Biographies of Early and Exceptional Ontario Lawyers of Diverse Communities Arranged By Year Called to the Bar, Part 1: 1797 to 1941 For each lawyer, this document offers some or all of the following information: name gender year and place of birth, and year of death where applicable year called to the bar in Ontario (and/or, until 1889, the year admitted to the courts as a solicitor; from 1889, all lawyers admitted to practice were admitted as both barristers and solicitors, and all were called to the bar) whether appointed K.C. or Q.C. name of diverse community or heritage biographical notes name of nominating person or organization if relevant sources used in preparing the biography (note: living lawyers provided or edited and approved their own biographies including the names of their community or heritage) suggestions for further reading, and photo where available. The biographies are ordered chronologically, by year called to the bar, then alphabetically by last name. To reach a particular period, click on the following links: 1941-1950, 1951-1960, 1961-1970, 1971-1980, 1981-1990, 1991-2000, 2001-. To download the biographies of lawyers called to the bar before 1941, please click Biographies of Early and Exceptional Ontario Lawyers of Diverse Communities Arranged By Year Called to the Bar, Part 2: 1941 to the Present For more information on the project, including the set of biographies arranged by diverse community rather than by year of call, please click here for the Diversifying the Bar: Lawyers Make History home page.
    [Show full text]
  • Gender Equality I
    Gender EqualityI.,. ,!Sa*=fl q J$ * ."" &,j & ;"<$$p "" !:A"- %* BY MICHELLE FALARDEAU-RAMSAY, Q.C, Pour montrer I'Pvolution des droits a I'PgalitP, lkuteure the future." In the early years of Confederation, women utilise, h commencer par les '5fameuses"du cas Personne en faced severe discrimination under the law and were sys- 1929, la tradition chez les Canadiennes, de se seruir du tematically excluded from the judicial system. Certain systi.me judiciaire incluant les tribunaux administratifj. criminal laws, such as infanticide, applied only to women, and different punishments for crimes were meted out When I graduated from law school in the late '50s, I was depending on the sex of the offender. Family law, under one of only six women in a class of 200. I was asked at the both civil law in Quebec and common law in other parts time, on more than one occasion, whether I was studying. - of Canada, treated women entirely as dependents. For law because I wanted to marry a lawyer, a question that example, a husband's permission was necessary for a wife would be inconceivable today. The first time I appeared in to engage in business, or even to administer or sell prop- court on behalf of a client, I was asked by a colleague erty which she had owned before marriage. whether I would cry if I lost the case. And I remember one Nor could women have any influence over the laws that occasion in the Montreal courthouse when three male affected them. Women could not vote or hold public colleagues stood guard while I used the men's washroom, office, and it was not until 1897 that the first woman- because it had not occurred to anyone to put aladies' room Clara Brett Martin-was admitted to the Bar of a Cana- in the area reserved for lawyers.
    [Show full text]
  • The New Process for Judicial Appointments to the Supreme Court of Canada
    THE NEW PROCESS FOR JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS TO THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA Report of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights Anthony Housefather Chair FEBRUARY 2017 42nd PARLIAMENT, 1st SESSION Published under the authority of the Speaker of the House of Commons SPEAKER’S PERMISSION Reproduction of the proceedings of the House of Commons and its Committees, in whole or in part and in any medium, is hereby permitted provided that the reproduction is accurate and is not presented as official. This permission does not extend to reproduction, distribution or use for commercial purpose of financial gain. Reproduction or use outside this permission or without authorization may be treated as copyright infringement in accordance with the Copyright Act. Authorization may be obtained on written application to the Office of the Speaker of the House of Commons. Reproduction in accordance with this permission does not constitute publication under the authority of the House of Commons. The absolute privilege that applies to the proceedings of the House of Commons does not extend to these permitted reproductions. Where a reproduction includes briefs to a Standing Committee of the House of Commons, authorization for reproduction may be required from the authors in accordance with the Copyright Act. Nothing in this permission abrogates or derogates from the privileges, powers, immunities and rights of the House of Commons and its Committees. For greater certainty, this permission does not affect the prohibition against impeaching or questioning the proceedings of the House of Commons in courts or otherwise. The House of Commons retains the right and privilege to find users in contempt of Parliament if a reproduction or use is not in accordance with this permission.
    [Show full text]
  • Precedent Unbound? Contemporary Approaches to Precedent in Canada
    The Peter A. Allard School of Law Allard Research Commons Faculty Publications Allard Faculty Publications 2007 Precedent Unbound? Contemporary Approaches to Precedent in Canada Debra Parkes Allard School of Law at the University of British Columbia, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.allard.ubc.ca/fac_pubs Part of the Courts Commons Citation Details Debra Parkes, "Precedent Unbound? Contemporary Approaches to Precedent in Canada" ([forthcoming in 2007]) 32:1 Man LJ 135. This Working Paper is brought to you for free and open access by the Allard Faculty Publications at Allard Research Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of Allard Research Commons. Page 1 TITLE: Precedent Unbound? Contemporary Approaches to Precedent in Canada AUTHOR: Debra Parkes SOURCE: Manitoba Law Journal CITED: (2007) 32 Man. L.J. 135 - 162 1 Stare decisis is an abbreviation of the Latin phrase stare decisis et non quieta movere, and may be translated as "to stand by decisions and not to disturb settled matters."1 In Gulliver's Travels, the English satirist Johnathan Swift had Gulliver say: It is a maxim among these lawyers, that whatever hath been done before, may le- gally be done again: and therefore they take special care to record all the deci- sions formerly made against common justice and the general reason of mankind. These under the name of precedents, they produce as authorities, to justify the most iniquitous opinions; and the judges never fail of decreeing accordingly.2 While the notion that Canadian appellate judges slavishly adhere to outdated precedent in a manner contrary to "common justice and the general re ason of mankind" does not accurately describe the current reality, there remains a lively and important debate about the functions, values and limits of "abiding by things decided" in common law systems.3 In this vein, Justices Steel and Freedman in the recent R.
    [Show full text]