Your search
Results 386 resources
-
"The Law of Contracts, third edition, is a thorough revision of this authoritative text in Irwin Law's Essentials of Canadian Law series. It includes discussion of recent jurisprudential developments in a variety of topics including: The impact of the ground-breaking decision in Bhasin v Hrynew, 2014 SCC 71, in articulating the general organizing principle requiring good faith performance underlying the existing law imposing duties of good faith contractual performance and the recognition of a new good faith duty of honest performance The potential implications of Bhasin v Hrynew for the duty to bargain in good faith The effect of the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in Canada (Attorney General) v Fairmont Hotels Inc, 2016 SCC 56, on the law of rectification for mistake The continuing development of the Canadian jurisprudence applying the Tercon rule to the enforceability of exculpatory clauses The impact of Uber Technologies Inc v Heller, 2020 SCC 16 and Douez v Facebook Inc, 2017 SCC 33, on the doctrine of unconscionability The potential impact of Southcott Estates Inc v Toronto District Catholic School Board, 2012 SCC 51, on the law of mitigation and of specific performance The effect of Globe Motors Inc v TRW Lucas Varity Electronic Steering Ltd (Eng CA) on the enforceability of "no oral variation" clauses The book also incorporates reference to recent Canadian cases on doctrines such as estoppel, privity, interpretation and appellate review, and discussion of recent leading authorities dealing with such matters as contractual interpretation and the application of the basic principles of formation to e-commerce. The Law of Contracts is an indispensible resource for anyone interested in modern Canadian contract law."--Publisher's description
-
For over 30 years, this book has set forth sentencing principles and analyses in order to help criminal defence lawyers formulate effective submissions to sentencing judges. Sentencing, regarded by many as “the sentencing bible”, canvasses the law of sentencing in a way that no other books on criminal law and sentencing are able: it succinctly outlines all of the significant facets of sentencing principles and procedure, and provides the reader with a comprehensive range of sentencing for various offences.
-
Le plus grand dictionnaire de la langue française en abonnement annuel. Découvrez toute la richesse et les subtilités de la langue classique et contemporaine révélée par la puissance du numérique. Le Grand Robert, la référence pour les utilisateurs les plus exigeants (écrivains, institutions, universités…) comme pour les passionnés.
-
This article critically considers the expanded use of reasonable hypotheticals in challenging the constitutionality of criminal offences under section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Charter). The author consolidates concerns raised by judges and scholars over use of the device and explains how these concerns are amplified in the first two constitutional challenges to three of Canada’s new criminal prostitution laws with potentially significant consequences for constitutional limitations on what can and cannot constitute a crime. The reasonable hypothetical is a device originally used by courts to evaluate the constitutionality of mandatory minimum sentences under section 12 of the Charter based on the circumstances of a reasonable hypothetical offender, rather than those of the actual offender before the court. Judges later expanded the use of the device to evaluate the constitutionality of criminal offences under section 7 based on the circumstances of a reasonable hypothetical accused, rather than those of the actual accused before the court. However, the process through which constitutionality is evaluated differs, raising distinct concerns about the use of hypotheticals in evaluating the constitutionality of criminal offences that have largely gone unexamined and unacknowledged. Concerns raised by judges and scholars about the use of reasonable hypotheticals fall into three categories: (1) the “air of unreality,” where the rights violation at issue does not arise on the facts of the case before the court; (2) the nature and scope of evidence that can, should, or must be before the court in cases where the device is used; and (3) the appropriate remedy where an impugned law applies in a constitutional manner to the offender or accused before the court, but in an unconstitutional manner in hypothetical circumstances. Each of these categories of concern is aggravated in the first two constitutional challenges to some of Canada’s new criminal commodification offences; the way hypotheticals are used in section 7 cases obscures the experiences of victims and complainants and allows courts to adjudicate constitutionality and remedy constitutional breaches based solely on hypotheticals and expert evidence. The author suggests that if courts continue to allow accused in criminal proceedings to use reasonable hypotheticals to challenge the constitutionality of offences under section 7 of the Charter, they undertake their evaluation of constitutionality with the benefit of adjudicative fact evidence about the circumstances of the case before them, to directly address how rights, interests, and values in tension with those of the hypothetical rights claimant may be relevant to a potential section 1 justification and tailor a remedy that meaningfully attends to the experiences of victims and complainants.
-
The norm against overbreadth—a law should not be overbroad in relation to its own purposes—is well established as a principle of fundamental justice under section 7 of the Charter. But the Supreme Court of Canada’s case law contains two competing formulations of this norm. According to the strict version of the norm, a law is overbroad if it applies in even one (actual or hypothetical) case that is not directly necessary to the achievement of its purpose. According to the relaxed version of the norm, a law is overbroad only if it applies in cases beyond those that are reasonably neces-sary to its operation. The strict version of the norm is unworkable because it relies on two un-tenable assumptions: first, that a law is always an instrument for achieving a purpose that can be fully specified apart from the idea of legal order; second, that a law can be drafted and applied so that it never goes beyond that pur-pose. The result is that, on a proper application of the strict version of the norm, all laws are overbroad. The relaxed version of the norm shares the first assumption but not the second. With respect to those laws that are properly characterized as instrumental, it would be bet-ter to abandon the strict version of the norm and adopt the relaxed version
-
"This comprehensive treatise covers both civil and criminal law evidence. The book is written for lawyers, judges and students, and covers evidence law topics such as standards of proof, hearsay, similar fact evidence, opinion evidence, witnesses, privilege, and admissibility of evidence."-- Provided by publisher.
Explore
Resource type
- Book (165)
- Book Section (22)
- Case (51)
- Dictionary Entry (26)
- Journal Article (116)
- Presentation (1)
- Report (5)
Topics
- Aboriginal law (1)
- Aboriginal peoples (1)
- Administrative law (4)
- Admissibility (1)
- Appeals (2)
- Bankruptcy and insolvency (2)
- Charter of Rights (3)
- Child and family services (1)
- Choice of forum (1)
- Communications law (1)
- Constitutional law (6)
- Copyright (7)
- Copyright Pentalogy (5)
- Court having jurisdiction (1)
- Courts (1)
- Criminal law (20)
- Custody (1)
- Division of powers (2)
- Evidence (2)
- Family law (1)
- Fitness to stand trial (1)
- Immigration (1)
- Infringement (2)
- Intellectual property (5)
- Judicial review (4)
- Jurisdiction (1)
- Prescription (1)
- Private international law (1)
- Property (1)
- Real property (1)
- Right to security of person (1)
- Sentencing (6)
- Sex workers (1)
- Sexual assault (1)
- Status of persons (1)
- Statutes (1)
- Telecommunications (1)
- Trafficking in persons (1)
- Trial (1)
- Young persons (2)