Full bibliography | SCC-Authors-Cited

Canada Office of the Correctional Investigator. (2017). Missed opportunities: the experience of young adults incarcerated in federal penitentiaries : final report. The Correctional Investigator Canada.

Canada Office of the Correctional Investigator. (2013). A case study of diversity in corrections: the Black inmate experience in federal penitentiaries : final report. Office of the Correctional Investigator of Canada.

Spotlight on Gladue: Challenges, Experiences, and Possibilities in Canada’s Criminal Justice System. (2017). Department of Justice Canada.

'In view of the implications of the Gladue and Ipeelee decisions for Canada's criminal justice system, this paper was designed to meet the following objectives: to provide a brief statistical overview on the overrepresentation of Indigenous persons in the Canadian correctional system, a summary of the legislative reforms that led to s. 718.2(e), and an overview of the court's interpretation in Gladue and Ipeelee; to analyze the key issues in the literature regarding the application of s. 718.2(e), and the Gladue and Ipeelee decisions in sentencing Indigenous individuals; to describe the justice system initiatives and programs that have been put in place to support the application of s. 718.2(e) in Canadian provinces and territories; and to summarize the studies on the experiences of members of the court system and Indigenous accused who have participated in Indigenous justice system initiatives"--Objectives, p. 5-6.

Canada Sentencing Commission. (1987). Sentencing reform: a Canadian approach. Supply & Services.

Berger, Benjamin L. (2020). Proportionality and the Experience of Punishment. In D. Cole & J. V. Roberts (Eds.), Sentencing in Canada: essays in law, policy, and practice (p. 368). Irwin Law.

"Sentencing in Canada contains a unique collection of essays that explore all key aspects of sentencing. The contributors include leading academics, criminal law practitioners, and members of the judiciary, and many of the authors have extensive experience working in the areas of sentencing and parole. The volume is not simply a statement of the law — instead, the chapters explore the wider context in which sentencing and parole decisions are taken. The volume also incorporates findings from the latest empirical research into sentencing policy and practice in Canada, including important issues such as sentencing Indigenous persons. As Mr Justice Moldaver notes in his preface, the volume “will be useful to criminal law practitioners and, more generally, to all persons interested in sentencing.”" - hinterer Umschlagtext

Watt, D. L., Beedell, J., Regimbald, G., Ragan, G., & Estabrooks, M. (2022). Supreme Court of Canada practice 2022. Carswell.

Webb, M. (2011). The Constitutional Question of Our Time: Extraterritorial Application of the Charter Afghan Detainees Case. National Journal of Constitutional Law, 28, 235.

West, L. (2022). Canada Stands Alone: A Comparative Analysis of the Extraterritorial Reach of State Human Rights Obligations. UBC Law Review, 55, 845.

West, L. (2022). ‘Within or outside Canada’: The Charter’s application to the extraterritorial activities of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service. University of Toronto Law Journal, 73(1), 1–52. https://doi.org/10.3138/utlj-2021-0105

Since the swift passage of the Anti-Terrorism Act in 2015, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) has had the unprecedented and highly controversial authority to take ‘reasonable and proportionate’ measures to reduce threats to Canadian security. While there are some limits to the types of measures CSIS can employ, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act permits the use of measures that would otherwise contravene the laws of Canada or limit a right protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms so long as they are judicially authorized by the Federal Court. As new threats proliferate around the world, it is anticipated that CSIS will increasingly carry out this mandate overseas. Yet review bodies tasked with monitoring CSIS’s use of threat reduction measures (TRMs) report that CSIS has never sought judicial authorization to conduct a TRM. Why? One answer may be that CSIS has concluded that the Charter does not govern actions carried out abroad, and, as such, their extraterritorial conduct falls beyond the reach and oversight of the Federal Court. Whether the Charter applies to CSIS’s overseas conduct ostensibly lies in the Supreme Court of Canada’s leading case on the extraterritorial application of the Charter, R v Hape. This article canvasses domestic and international law, as well as intelligence law theory, to explain why that presumption is wrong. Wrong, not least because the majority opinion in Hape is deeply flawed in its analysis and application of international law. But also, because intelligence operations are so distinguishable from the transnational criminal investigations at issue in Hape, the Court’s findings are inapplicable in the former context. In short, this article demonstrates that applying Hape to the actions of CSIS officers not only leaves their actions beyond the scrutiny of Canadian courts but also creates a significant human rights gap.

View on utppublishing.com

Verdier, P.-H. (2008). International Decisions: R. V. Hape. The American Journal of International Law, 102(1), 143–148. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40007775

View on www.jstor.org

Ert, G. van. (2008). Canadian Cases in Public International Law in 2006–7 / Jurisprudence canadienne en matière de droit international public en 2006–7. Canadian Yearbook of International Law, 45, 527–346. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0069005800009425

Evidence — letters rogatory — public policy against extraterritorial applications of US lawMorgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP v. Gauthier (2006), 82 OR (3d) 189 (29 August 2006). Ontario Superior Court of Justice.The applicant MLB was a US law firm carrying on business principally in Philadelphia. It sought an order from the Ontario Superior Court of Justice giving effect to a letter of request issued by the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania. This court sought the assistance of the Ontario court in obtaining document production and testimony from the respondent, Claude Gauthier, a Canadian citizen resident in Ontario.

View on www.cambridge.org

Sun, K. (2019). International Comity and the Construction of the Charter’s Limits: Hape Revisited. Queen’s Law Journal, 45, 115.

Sethi, C. (2011). Does the Charter Follow the Flag-Revisiting Constitutional Extraterritoriality after R v Hape. Dalhousie Journal of Legal Studies, 20, 102.

Saunders, P., Currie, R. J., Akhavan, P., Brunnée, J., Van Ert, G., McDorman, T. L., Mégret, F., Mgbeoji, I., Mickelson, K., Reif, L. C., Waters, C. P. M., & Castel, J.-G. (2019). Kindred’s international law, chiefly as interpreted and applied in Canada (Ninth edition.). Emond.

"The book delivers a comprehensive overview of the foundational concepts, principles, sources, and institutions of the international legal system and how they are experienced and practiced domestically and in foreign relations"-- Résumé de l'éditeur.

Roach, Kent. (2007). R. v. Hape Creates Charter-Free Zones for Canadian Officials Abroad Editorial. Criminal Law Quarterly, 53(1), 1–4. https://heinonline.org/HOL/P?h=hein.journals/clwqrty53&i=3

View on heinonline.org

Milanovic, M. (2011). Extraterritorial application of human rights treaties: law, principles, and policy. Oxford University Press.

McLachlan, C. (2014). Foreign relations law. Cambridge University Press.

"[E]very international dispute is of a political character, if by that is meant that it is of importance to the State in question. Thus viewed, the proposition that some legal questions are political is an understatement of what is believed to be the true position. The State is a political institution, and all questions which affect it as a whole, in particular in its relations with other States, are therefore political"-- Provided by publisher.

Keitner, C. I. (2011). Rights beyond borders. Yale Journal of International Law, 36, 55.

Noura, K. (2013). L’application de la Charte canadienne des droits et libertés par les valeurs: l’article 32. In G. A. Beaudoin, E. Mendes, & S. Beaulac (Eds.), Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (5th ed.). LexisNexis Butterworths.

Jorgensen, L. (2013). In Plain View: R v Jones and the Challenge of Protecting Privacy Rights in an Era of Computer Search. UBC Law Review, 46, 791.

Search

Full bibliography 1,236 resources

Explore

Resource type

Topics

Publication year