Your search

"The effective implementation of human rights treaty obligations in national law is subject to increasing attention. The main responsibility for the international monitoring of national implementation at the global level is entrusted to the UN human rights treaty bodies. These bodies are established by the respective human rights conventions and are composed of independent experts. This book examines three aspects of these bodies: the legal aspects of their structure, functions and decisions; their effectiveness in ensuring respect for human rights obligations; and the legitimacy of these bodies and their decisions. Containing contributions from a variety of eminent legal experts, including present and former members of the treaty bodies, the analysis should be read in light of the ongoing effort to strengthen treaty bodies under the auspices of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and with the involvement of relevant stakeholders"--Provided by publisher.

This article draws upon social interaction theory (the work of Irwin Altman) to develop a theory of the right to privacy, which reflects the way that privacy is experienced. This theory states that the right to privacy is a right to respect for barriers, and that an invasion of privacy occurs when a privacy barrier is penetrated. The first part of the paper establishes the position of the author's theory in the existing scholarship. The second part of the paper expands upon the theory to explain the nature of privacy barriers and the way that the author's theory manages a number of specific privacy issues, including threats to privacy, attempted invasions of privacy, unforeseeable interferences with privacy and waiving the right to privacy. The final part of the paper demonstrates the impact that this approach to privacy could have upon judicial reasoning, in particular Article 8 European Convention on Human Rights.

Disclaimer: This summary was generated by AI based on the content of the source document.

The Court of Quebec today is an impressive institution in terms of the range and variety of its areas of responsibility in both civil and criminal matters, and also in administrative law and related matters. What is the true vocation of this Court ? Recently an Administrative and Appellate Division was created. The significance of appeals to the Court of Québec is a controversial topic, since it is not a superior court. There have been several decisive turning-points in the contemporary history of the Court. In 1965, the Supreme Court allowed a significant expansion of its civil jurisdiction to include, for example, administrative contracts and the civil liability of the Public Administration. On the other hand, in 1972 the Supreme Court deprived the Court of one of its traditional responsibilities in the field of municipal law, namely challenges to municipal by-laws on grounds of illegality. The specific role of the Court as the court of appeal for administrative law was studied in the Dussault Report in 1970, the White Paper of 1975, the Ouellette Report of 1987 and the Garant Report in 1994. During the 1970s, the Legislature continued to multiply rights of appeal to the Court, while setting up several key administrative appeal tribunals such as the Labour Court, the Transport Tribunal and the Professions Tribunal, to which it appointed judges of the Court. The Court has become the largest judicial institution in Quebec, with 270 regular judges and 33 justices of the peace. Since the 1960s, the Court has enjoyed the favour of the Quebec Legislature. However in 1996-97, the Court lost certain appeal responsibilities to the Administrative Tribunal of Québec, but remained an important appeal tribunal in a variety of fields, including expropriation, income tax, municipal taxation, electoral disputes, agricultural land protection, police ethics, housing, and access to information. The Court also hears appeals from several administrative tribunals. However, the key question here is to clarify the scope of the judicial review exercised by the Quebec Court as compared to that exercised by the Superior Court…

Disclaimer: This summary was generated by AI based on the content of the source document.

Conformément à sa mission de veiller à la promotion et au respect des principes contenus dans la Charte des droits et libertés de la personne du Québec, la Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse s'implique activement, depuis plus de 30 ans, dans le dossier de l'accommodement des personnes en situation de handicap afin de tenir compte de leurs besoins éducatifs particuliers, et ce à tous les ordres d'enseignement, du préscolaire à l'universitaire. Le présent avis vise à répondre aux demandes qui ont été adressées à la Commission dans les derniéres années par plusieurs acteurs du réseau collégial public et privé et qui concernent l'obligation d'accommodement des étudiants en situation de handicap.

Punitive damages have always attracted a lukewarm reception in Quebec law. This article analyses the recent de Montigny and Ward judgments of the Supreme Court, which resolve some important issues about which Quebec doctrine and case law were divided. First, the Supreme Court stated that punitive damages constitute an autonomous remedy that may be sought independently of a condemnation in compensatory damages. It also held that punitive damages may pursue the goals of punishment, deterrence and denunciation. Lastly, the Court sends a message of moderation as regards the quantum of punitive damages.

Under the common law, it is widely accepted that punitive damages may be awarded in situations where a defendant’s conduct has been malicious, oppressive or abusive. An award of exemplary damages seeks to punish the defendant, acts as a deterrent to the defendant and to others from acting in this manner and expresses the outrage of the court regarding the defendant’s behavior. On the contrary, under Quebec law, the awarding of punitive damages remains exceptional in nature.

In this groundbreaking book, Scalia and Garner systematically explain all the most important principles of constitutional, statutory, and contractual interpretation in an engaging and informative style - with hundreds of illustrations from actual cases. Is a burrito a sandwich? Is a corporation entitled to personal privacy? If you trade a gun for drugs, are you "using a gun" in a drug transaction? The authors grapple with these and dozens of equally curious questions while explaining the most principled, lucid, and reliable techniques for deriving meaning from authoritative texts. Meanwhile, the book takes up some of the most controversial issues in modern jurisprudence. The authors write with a well-argued point of view that is definitive yet nuanced, straightforward yet sophisticated. - Publisher.

Over the last century, all common law countries have experienced a movement away from a highly discretionary sentencing environment to one in which judicial discretion is more constrained. (For general discussion of structured sentencing, see chapter 6 of A. von Hirsch, A. Ashworth and J. V. Roberts (eds), Principled Sentencing: Readings on Theory and Policy (3rd edn, Oxford: Hart, 2009).) Some jurisdictions have transformed their sentencing environments by introducing relatively inflexible and tightly binding guideline schemes. Others have taken a middle ground – creating advisory guidance schemes – while a third category has resisted all attempts to structure judicial discretion. This essay describes and compares the divergent histories of two jurisdictions – Canada, and England and Wales – as they have confronted the challenge of structuring sentencing. Despite similarities in the way that sentencing is approached in the two countries they have taken remarkably divergent paths over the past 25 years – and not in the directions that might have been anticipated back in the mid 1980s. After a promising start in that decade, Canada has rejected the adoption of sentencing guidelines, and elected to retain its traditional, highly discretionary approach to sentencing. In contrast, England and Wales has slowly, but surely, adopted a comprehensive and relatively binding set of guidelines, although this outcome also seemed unlikely in 1988.