Your search
Results 138 resources
-
The present study revolves around an observation by the Honorable Nicholas Kasirer according to which an incompatibility of temperament exists between civil liability and conjugal life, making it difficult to sanction faults committed between spouses or de facto spouses by virtue of the extra- contractual liability regime. Drawing a connection between two legal disciplines - family law and civil liability - the proposed reflection revolves around the deviations incurred by the norm depending on the bond uniting the parties. In order to identify these deviations, the author first turns their gaze to the past, highlighting the technical and moral obstacles that have historically hindered the effectiveness of the law of extracontractual liability in the conjugal context. A picture of the contemporary jurisprudential treatment of the various faults relating to conjugal and married life is then drawn up. Through this exercise, certain behaviors recently assimilated to the commission of a civil fault, such as parental alienation, are highlighted. At the end of this portrait, the reader will be able to observe the shift incurred by the aims of the law of extracontractual liability as it interacts with the conjugal and marital cell. Initially used as a tool to protect the institution of marriage, the general regime of extra-contractual liability is increasingly seen as an essential vector in the establishment of a fundamental conjugal and marital civility.
-
Le présent ouvrage rassemble les textes des conférences prononcées lors du colloque intitulé "Développements récents en droit criminel", qui s'est tenu à Montréal, le 6 octobre 2022. -- Quatrième de couverture
-
During the last two decades, the Supreme Court of Canada created and authorized new police powers that are exercised routinely. For example, the Court authorized police officers to stop motor vehicles at random, detain individuals for investigative purposes, and carry out preventive frisk searches on people. The Court stated that judges can use the “ancillary powers doctrine” to create new police powers that fill legislative gaps.
-
"Est-il possible d'enrichir le patrimoine lettré de la Nouvelle-France en lui adjoignant des oeuvres de fiction? En amont de cette réflexion théorique commencée par Bernard Andrès (et que prolonge Rêver le Nouveau Monde), il y a les 16 pièces de la présente anthologie. Aussi françaises à l'origine que le corpus de la Nouvelle-France dont elles s'inspirent en partie, elles n'ont pas encore reçu leurs lettres de naturalisation. Or, cette formalité ne doit pas nous empêcher de lire et de (re)découvrir ces oeuvres méconnues, voire oubliées, qui tout au long du xviiie siècle égayèrent les théâtres de Paris en recourant à l'exotisme canadien. Les pièces de théâtre présentes dans cette anthologie permettent de lire sérieusement, peut-être pour la première fois, des oeuvres qui révèlent le foisonnement de l'imaginaire théâtral français du XVIIIe siècle à l'égard de sa lointaine colonie canadienne, alors perçue comme une terre de liberté."-- Fourni par l'éditeur.
-
The lawyer’s duty to encourage respect for the administration of justice remains largely amorphous and abstract. In this article, I draw lessons about this duty from historical instances in which Attorneys General inappropriately criticized judges. Not only are Attorneys General some of the highest-profile lawyers in the country, but they also face unique tensions and pressures that bring their duties as lawyers into stark relief. I focus on the two instances where law societies sought to discipline Attorneys General for such criticism of judges, as well as a more recent instance in which no discipline proceedings were pursued. I also consider the obligations of Attorneys General when other Ministers inappropriately criticize judges. I conclude that a lawyer must take all reasonable steps in the circumstances to confirm the factual and legal accuracy of any criticism of the judiciary; that law societies should allow reasonable but defined latitude for public criticism of judges; and that, where a client inappropriately criticizes the judiciary, their lawyer must make good-faith efforts to urge the client to discontinue and apologize for such criticism—and if those efforts are unsuccessful, the lawyer must repudiate that criticism themselves or withdraw.
-
Joyce DeWitt-Van Oosten, National Criminal Law Program, 2022 CanLIIDocs 4780
-
Disclaimer: This summary was generated by AI based on the content of the source document.
Explore
Resource type
- Blog Post (1)
- Book (38)
- Book Section (9)
- Case (54)
- Document (1)
- Journal Article (33)
- Presentation (1)
- Thesis (1)
Topics
- Abuse of process (5)
- Administrative law (2)
- Arrest (1)
- Bankruptcy and insolvency (1)
- Charter of Rights (13)
- Civil procedure (2)
- Constitutional law (14)
- Costs (1)
- Criminal law (22)
- Custody (1)
- Evidence (4)
- Expropriation (1)
- Family law (2)
- Income tax (2)
- Intellectual property (2)
- Patents (1)
- Sentencing (1)
- Sexual assault (1)
- Taxation (2)
- Transportation law (1)
- Trial (3)