Canada case in a way in which the facts are stated accurately. However, there is the possibility that a legal positivist would also explain this case in a more biased manner by considering Ms. Baker’s arguments as extraneous. By understanding how this perspective would approach this case, the connection between morality and the law can be found in the ratio, and the significance of procedural fairness can be seen as articulated through the basic rule or principle in the case. A legal positivist would agree with a majority of the courts’ assessments, except the Supreme Court of Canada’s assessment; however, the assessment of a legal positivist could also be considered as incorrect. Yet, if the legal positivist were to look at this case through a slightly different view, they would agree with the Supreme Court’s assessment and be considered correct.…
In the book Mighty Judgement, Philip Slayton talks about the Supreme Court of Canada as a government institution which needs reform on the premises that Supreme Court of Canada is powerful, paternalistic, competent, undemocratic, and secretive. Slayton begins with the question of whether judges make or interpret the law and whether they should be doing only one of those things. Also, he describes the historical past of the Supreme Court, and how the 1982 Charter of Rights and Freedoms affected the cases which reach the Supreme Court. Slayton also analyzed the Supreme Court of Canada and came up with possible overdue reforms based on his experience as a lawyer, academic, and a previous Supreme Court clerk.…
One of the hallmarks of Stephen Harper’s tenure as Prime Minister was the adversarial relationship between Parliament and the courts. His government was “openly hostile towards the judicial branch” and often failed to take its Charter duties seriously. Harper’s lack of deference for the right and freedoms entrenched in the Charter led to several of his government’s laws being struck down by the Supreme Court of Canada. Conversely, the appeal of Frank v. Canada was a victory for the Conservative government – although the impugned legislation had been enacted over a decade before Harper became Prime Minister. It is still possible for the challenged sections of the Canada Elections Act to be declared unconstitutional, however, as the case is being appealed in the SCC.…
Firstly, the political impact this case had was can a provincial act over reach their boundaries and maybe even frustrate parliament and get away with it? The case stated that the decision made by the judges favored s.6 of the provincial act over s.30 of the federal act because it fufilled the purpose more than s. 30. It led to many questions raised in this case, in whereby how far can provinces can enact their regulations in so far it does not frustrate the federal enactment. The doctrine of paramountcy is one of great complexity and requires a great analysis in truly to understand it, especially when bringing it up to court. It requires knowledge about both provincial and federal powers.…
Eddie Money’s drummer, Glenn Symmonds sued for wrongful termination in October. More recently, his fiancé decided to join the suit with sexual harassment claims against Money. The original discrimination suit claimed that Money mocked his disabilities on stage and sexually harassed his fiancé (with repeated lewd advances). The sexual harassment claims were included in an amended lawsuit that was filed in California state court.…
In many ways, the Supreme Court acts as both moral and legal arbiter of the nation. Supreme Court decisions all have the potential to have a tremendous impact on the lives of Americans. Some decisions have transformed American society. On April 29, 2015, the Supreme Court Case of Glossip v. Gross was argued.…
This essay will discuss the case of R v. Labaye. A summary of the nature of the proceeding and the judges writing decision, facts, legal issues, the decision, judicial reasoning and a thorough analysis will be addressed in this essay. I prefer the reasoning of the majority decision as it is reasonable and ethical. The nature of the proceeding is an appeal heard from the Supreme Court of Canada.…
In the case of United States vs. Walter Liew, Liew is being charged with over 20 criminal counts, with one of them being misappropriation of trade secrets (Levine). Liew had gotten paid millions of dollars by a Chinese company to apprehend trade secrets of the American company Dupont in order to solidify the company in China. Liew, 56, living in California, received 28 million in order to bribe engineers and other employees for confidential paperwork that the Chinese company wanted. What was the score? A chemical pigment recipe that could make things such as paper, plastics, and lots of other items whiter (Levine).…
The case states that even with the new type of test for harm, it is still not properly being implemented in the lower levels of courts in Canada. Although this case was only fighting to change the criminal code its extremely important in showing which theory of Harm is the best fit for…
Sociology of Law Take Home Exam Question #2 - Morgentaler Based on the documentary “Democracy on Trial” the response that the Canadian legal system had to the issues that had been presented to them because of the illegal actions of Henry Morgentaler were the following. The court system responded to the actions of Henry Morgentaler by charging him on multiple occasions for the performing of abortions that had been illegal at the time. While some police responded differently because they were able to acknowledge that abortions were against the law because they had seen the negative effects of botched abortions. Finally, the jury system responded to Morgentaler by having him found not guilty for his acts on multiple occasions.…
The Charter of Rights and Freedoms was established in 1982 and since its creation it has made a huge impact on the legal and political landscape of Canada. Some believe that the Charter has undermined democracy and put too much power into the hands of the courts that are not elected by the people. Some also contest that the Canadian courts are becoming lawmakers and are becoming activists. However, these claims have little truth when looking at what the Supreme Court has accomplished since the enactment of the Charter. The courts use and distribute their power conservatively because of how it effects the Canadian political landscape.…
Balancing the tension between community interest and individual rights and freedoms are a significant component of the criminal trial process and is relatively successful in that retrospect. In order to be effective and efficient the criminal trial process should reflect the moral and ethical standards of society, ensure the community is sufficiently protected and respects the rights of the individual. However, despite efforts to achieve justice for all members of society, the criminal trial process does fail to provide adequate success in some areas of the law such as the jury system, Legal Aid and the provocation defence. All these areas to an extent highlight the lack of success the criminal trial process serves in balancing community interests…
The new Constitution decided and ratified by a majority of these states of America must be brought forth to bring a need of orderly conduct and laws under a federal government to the people of this nation, a new framework of governance that must be a republican type of government for these states. The new system of governance must be able to provide a more effective means of management. The previous “Articles of the Confederation” did not arrange for an effective government for this young nation, it did not sustain an effective administration and encouraged disunity and must be replaced with a new government. The new format of the government under the Constitution is agreeable due to both the active participation and the limits given to each…
After participating in and reviewing the Q.B trial R v. Perry & Manitoba in regards to the role of the investigator, and the physical evidence that was implemented in the trial, four individual pieces of physical evidence were introduced to the court by the investigator (cite). These four pieces of evidence consist of, a black wallet that was found on Matlock Manitoba, a time X watch found on Mason Perry, and a knife and a replica firearm found in a dumpster, in the back ally where Mason Perry and Matlock Manitoba were arrested. In relation to the introduction of evidence, the wallet, and Time X watch that supposedly belonged to Monty Hall was first introduced into court by the Crown during the testimony of Monty Hall, stating that his black wallet and Time X watch was stolen from him during the robbery. Additionally, they were shown to Hall asking how both compared to the ones that were stolen, then entered them into court as exhibit one and two. The physical evidence was then brought up once again when Constable York started his testimony, adding that Manitoba was in possession of the wallet and Perry of the Time X watch when found hiding in a bush within the back ally.…
The American Judicial System is responsible for providing impartiality, order, equality, justice, and fair punishment under the Federal Laws that are governed by the Constitution of the United States. Supreme Court According to the Glossary of Legal Terms (n.d.), A Court is a governing body of leaders that has the authority to settle, manage, or control legal issues and disputes. The Supreme Court is the highest-ranking court under the law of the Constitution in the United States of America. (The Supreme Court of the United States, June 04, 2017).…