Results | SCC-Authors-Cited

Lederman, W. R. (1991). Charter influences on future constitutional reform. In After Meech Lake - lessons for the future (pp. 115–120).

MacDonnell, V., Daly, P., & Albert, R. (2019). Section 96: Striking a Balance between Legal Centralism and Legal Pluralism. In The Canadian Constitution in Transition (pp. 84–102). University of Toronto Press. https://doi.org/10.3138/9781487519117-004

Huguette St-Louis. (2007). Reform of the Trial Courts in Quebec. In Canada’s Trial Courts. University of Toronto Press. https://doi.org/10.3138/9781442684119.9

I am one of those who believe that the courts are not static institutions. On the contrary, they must adapt to the expectations of the system’s users. In an article published in 2000 in theCanadian Bar Review, Judge Gerald Seniuk and Professor Noel Lyon showed that the development of the Provincial Courts raises many problems, not the least of them being the tendency of the system to evolve in a way that no longer fits the constitutional framework.¹ In this context, and in light of concrete examples and the reflections of experts, we must be particularly attentive to this

Bray, S. L. (2019). Fiduciary Remedies. In The Oxford Handbook of Fiduciary Law. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190634100.013.25

This chapter offers an overview and analysis of fiduciary remedies. The remedies considered are accounting for profits, constructive trust, equitable compensation, injunction, the unwinding remedies (e.g., rescission), and the supervisory remedies (e.g., instruction, removal). One point of emphasis is the close relationship between fiduciary duties and fiduciary remedies. The chapter also distinguishes the remedies of fiduciary law from those of agency. In addition, the chapter considers three major unsettled questions. First, are the remedial aims of fiduciary law distinct from tort and contract? Second, how should judges and scholars think about fiduciary remedies in light of the distinction between law and equity? Third, is punishment of an erring fiduciary a legitimate aim for fiduciary remedies?

Simard, R. P. (2011). Priorités et droits spéciaux de la couronne. In JurisClasseur Québec. Sûretés. (Vol. 1). LexisNexis.

Hanlon, M. J., Tickle, V., & Csiszar, E. (2019). Conflicting Case Law, Competing Statutes, and the Confounding Priority Battle of the Interim Financing Charge and the Crown’s Deemed Trust for Source Deductions. In J. P. Sarra (Ed.), 2019 Annual review of insolvency law. (p. 897). Thomson Carswell.

Geist, M. (2013). Fairness Found: How Canada Quietly Shifted from Fair Dealing to Fair Use. In M. Geist (Ed.), The Copyright Pentalogy. University of Ottawa Press.

The breadth and scope of copyright limitations and exceptions has emerged as a major policy issue around the world.² Some narrow limitations on copyright holders’ rights, such as quotation, remain uncontroversial, yet more expansive, flexible exceptions have generated fierce debate. Virtually all domestic copyright laws include some limitations and exceptions to the exclusive rights otherwise granted to copyright holders, typically achieved through the adoption of one of two models. One approach is a “fair use” model, which is widely viewed as the most flexible limitation and exception on the copyright holders’ rights, given its potential applicability to any circumstance or

Trosow, S. E. (2010). Bill C-32 and the Educational Sector: Overcoming Impediments to Fair Dealing. In M. Geist (Ed.), From “Radical Extremism” to “Balanced Copyright” (p. 541). Irwin Law.

Craig, C. (2010). Locking Out Lawful Users: Fair Dealing and Anti-Circumvention in Bill C‑32. In M. Geist (Ed.), From “Radical Extremism” to “Balanced Copyright” (p. 177). Irwin Law.

Tawfik, M. J. (2010). History in the Balance: Copyright and Access to Knowledge. In M. Geist (Ed.), From “Radical Extremism” to “Balanced Copyright” (p. 69). Irwin Law.

Barbeau, F. (2020). Rétractation du jugement. In JurisClasseur Québec. Procédure civile. I. LexisNexis. (Original work published 2015)

Newman, D. (2019). Canada’s Notwithstanding Clause, Dialogue, and Constitutional Identities. In G. Sigalet, G. C. N. Webber, & R. Dixon (Eds.), Constitutional Dialogue (pp. 209–234). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108277938.009

Urbinati, N. (2014). Free Speech as the Citizen’s Right. In R. Post (Ed.), Citizens divided: campaign finance reform and the constitution (p. 125). Harvard University Press.

Siegel, D. (2009). Ontario. In A. Sancton, R. A. Young, & Institute of Public Administration of Canada (Eds.), Foundations of governance: municipal government in Canada’s provinces (p. 20). University of Toronto Press.

Bhagwat, A., & Weinstein, J. (2021). Freedom of Expression and Democracy. In The Oxford Handbook of Freedom of Speech (p. 82). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198827580.013.5

This chapter focuses on the relationship between freedom of expression and democracy from both a historical and a theoretical perspective. The term ‘freedom of expression’ includes free speech, freedom of the press, the right to petition government, and freedom of political association. Eighteenth-century proponents of popular government had long offered democratic justifications for freedom of expression. The chapter then demonstrates that freedom of political expression is a necessary component of democracy. It describes two core functions of such expression: an informing and a legitimating one. Finally, the chapter examines the concept of ‘democracy’, noting various ways in which democracies vary among themselves, as well as the implications of those variations for freedom of expression. Even before democratic forms of government took root in the modern world.

Walters, M. D. (2010). Written Constitutions and Unwritten Constitutionalism. In G. Huscroft (Ed.), Expounding the constitution: essays in constitutional theory (p. 245). Cambridge University Press. (Original work published 2008)

Ferzan, K. (2011). Justification and Excuse. In J. Deigh & D. Dolinko (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of philosophy of criminal law (p. 239). Oxford University Press.

Fletcher, G. P. (2013). The Right and the Reasonable. In G. P. Fletcher & R. L. Christopher (Eds.), Fletcher’s essays on criminal law (p. 150). Oxford University Press.

Charpentier, É. (2012). Pour une interprétation (très) large de l’article 1437 du Code civil du Québec. In J.-L. Baudouin, B. Moore, & Chaire Jean-Louis Baudouin en droit civil (Eds.), Mélanges Jean-Louis Baudouin (p. 255). Éditions Yvon Blais.

Jestaz, P. (2005). L’obligation et la sanction: à la recherche de l’obligation fondamentale. In P. Jestaz (Ed.), Autour du droit civil: Ecrits dispersés, idées convergentes. Dalloz.

Your search

Results 209 resources

Explore

Resource type

Publication year