Your search
Results 654 resources
-
This chapter explores customary refugee law. Refugee law is primarily treaty law. However, many of the major refugee-receiving countries are not parties to either the Refugee Convention or the Refugee Protocol, for example Bangladesh, Pakistan, India, Iran, Jordan, and Lebanon. Hence, customary international refugee law can be critically important in the identification of key principles of refugee protection and as an indication of what is permitted or not. While customary international law may not play as significant a role in refugee law as it does in other areas of international law, there are at least three practices of refugee protection aimed at safeguarding access and admission to refugee protection for which varying degrees of agreement exist in favour of a rule (or emerging rule) of customary law: non-refoulement, temporary refuge, and the right to be granted (to receive) asylum. These practices are deeply intertwined in their humanitarian purpose.
-
Rendered in December 2019, the Vavilov decision sets the contemporary analytical framework for the judicial review of an administrative decision on the merits. On this occasion, the Supreme Court expressed the desire to add a certain degree of certainty and consistency to this field of law. This article focuses on the new approach’s propensity to achieve that goal. The analysis begins with the observation that there exists a connection between the instability that has historically characterized the law of judicial review and the failure of previous approaches to adequately guide reviewing courts in the fulfillment of their mission, which consists of balancing the rule of law and legislative supremacy. In light of earlier case law, the author concludes that the Vavilov decision offers the prospect of greater certainty in determining the applicable standard of review, but that the risk of instability remains with respect to the application of the reasonableness standard. Indeed, while the Supreme Court’s guidance in this regard generally reflects a concern to alleviate the tension underlying the relationship between rule of law and legislative supremacy principles, some of the majority justices’ assertions, namely that certain statutory provisions “relating to the scope of a decision maker’s authority” may involve only one interpretation, may weaken the self-discipline of reviewing courts on which judicial deference is based.
-
Disclaimer: This summary was generated by AI based on the content of the source document.
-
In my post on “Unreasonable Bilingual Interpretations of Law“, I mentioned that the Supreme Court would have the opportunity in Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) v. Mason, 2021 FCA 156 (leave granted) to say more about the methodology of reviewing administrative interpretations of law. Mason raises other issues as well, one of which also arose in […]
-
"Environmental Law and Policy, Fourth Edition examines environmental law across Canada, offering perspectives from each region and presenting samples of statutes, regulations, guidelines, cases, government policy, and academic writings. This casebook illustrates the links between environmental law and other related areas including science, politics, economics, and basic ethical and philosophical concerns."-- Provided by publisher
-
"Legislated impact assessment requirements were first introduced over fifty years ago with the National Environmental Policy Act in the United States and have since spread to over a hundred and fifty jurisdictions around the world. The details have varied widely, reflecting the global diversity of socio-ecological and governance systems and associated issues, traditions, capacities, ambitions, and power structures. In 2015, Canada embarked on a task that no other country has attempted in recent years: fundamentally reconsidering how best to tackle environmental assessment. This review and revision process ended with the passage of the Impact Assessment Act (IAA) in 2019. The Next Generation of Impact Assessment explores the evolution of the Canadian assessment process and evaluates the effectiveness of the IAA."-- Provided by publisher.
-
"Legislated impact assessment requirements were first introduced over fifty years ago with the National Environmental Policy Act in the United States and have since spread to over a hundred and fifty jurisdictions around the world. The details have varied widely, reflecting the global diversity of socio-ecological and governance systems and associated issues, traditions, capacities, ambitions, and power structures. In 2015, Canada embarked on a task that no other country has attempted in recent years: fundamentally reconsidering how best to tackle environmental assessment. This review and revision process ended with the passage of the Impact Assessment Act (IAA) in 2019. The Next Generation of Impact Assessment explores the evolution of the Canadian assessment process and evaluates the effectiveness of the IAA."-- Provided by publisher.
-
Disclaimer: This summary was generated by AI based on the content of the source document.
-
This is the first part of a 2-volume set that presents an in-depth investigation into the canon of constitutionally conforming interpretation. These volumes address the fundamental issues the canon raises in the national, supranational and international contexts. In volume 1, experts from 19 jurisdictions, including Brazil, Canada, India, the UK, and the USA, present reports which give concise overviews of the approaches and debates on constitutionally conforming interpretation. These reports cover the structural background, the conditions of application, as well as issues of competence. Further aspects discussed are its perceived normativity and popularity in everyday legal practice. Together with volume 2, which explores the canon’s use and theoretical impact beyond the national context in a comparative and critical manner, this book fills an important gap in legal scholarship and sets the stage for cross-national discourse.
Explore
Resource type
- Blog Post (5)
- Book (192)
- Book Section (45)
- Case (218)
- Dictionary Entry (33)
- Document (1)
- Journal Article (152)
- Magazine Article (2)
- Newspaper Article (1)
- Presentation (1)
- Report (4)
Topics
- Aboriginal law (4)
- Aboriginal peoples (2)
- Abuse of process (5)
- Access to information (1)
- Administrative law (9)
- Admissibility (1)
- Appeals (5)
- Arrest (2)
- Assurance (1)
- Bankruptcy and insolvency (6)
- Banks (1)
- Charge to jury (2)
- Charter of Rights (29)
- Child and family services (1)
- Choice of forum (1)
- Civil liability (1)
- Civil procedure (2)
- Communications law (1)
- Constitutional law (45)
- Contracts (2)
- Copyright (1)
- Costs (1)
- Court having jurisdiction (1)
- Courts (8)
- Criminal law (85)
- Crown law (1)
- Custody (4)
- Declaration of invalidity (1)
- Discoverability (1)
- Division of powers (4)
- Evidence (15)
- Expropriation (2)
- Extraterritoriality (1)
- Family law (7)
- Fiduciary duty (1)
- Financial institutions (1)
- Fitness to stand trial (1)
- Habeas corpus (1)
- Human rights (1)
- Immigration (3)
- Impaired driving (2)
- Income tax (4)
- Informer privilege (1)
- Insurance (2)
- Intellectual property (3)
- Judicial review (3)
- Jurisdiction (5)
- Labour relations (1)
- Limitation of actions (1)
- Mediation (1)
- Negligence (1)
- Obligation of loyalty (1)
- Obstructing justice (1)
- Occupational health and safety (1)
- Open court principle (1)
- Patents (1)
- Prerogative writs (1)
- Prescription (1)
- Private international law (2)
- Property (1)
- Prosecutorial immunity (1)
- Provincial offences (1)
- Publication bans (1)
- Real property (1)
- Right to security of person (1)
- Sale of goods (1)
- Securities (1)
- Sentencing (9)
- Sex workers (1)
- Sexual assault (6)
- Status of persons (1)
- Statutes (1)
- Taxation (6)
- Telecommunications (1)
- Torts (1)
- Trafficking in persons (1)
- Transportation law (2)
- Treaty rights (1)
- Trial (5)
- Voyeurism (1)
- Young persons (2)