Results | SCC-Authors-Cited

Friedland, M. (1994). Reforming Police Powers: Who’s in Charge? In Police Powers in Canada. University of Toronto Press. https://doi.org/10.3138/9781442678583.11

When the Law Reform Commission of Canada was established in 1971,¹ it was thought that, within the then foreseeable future, Canada would have a new Criminal Code covering criminal law and procedure. The minister of justice, John Turner, stated in the House when the bill was under consideration that ‘the Commission should have a complete rewriting of the criminal law as one of its first projects.’² The original commission – and I should declare that I was one of the original commissioners – contemplated a new Code of Criminal Law and Procedure in its first research program, commencing with procedure:

Archibald, B. P. (1982). The Law of Arrest. In V. M. Del Buono (Ed.), Criminal procedure in Canada: studies (p. 125). Butterworths.

Huscroft, G. (2014). Introduction. In B. W. Miller & G. Webber (Eds.), Proportionality and the Rule of Law (pp. 1–18). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107565272.002

Tremblay, L. B. (2009). Le fondement normatif du principe de proportionnalité en théorie constitutionnelle. In G. C. N. Webber (Ed.), The limitation of Charter Rights : critical essays on R. v. Oakes. Éditions Thémis.

Panaccio, C.-M. (2017). The Justification of Rights Violations: Section 1 of the Charter. In The Oxford Handbook of the Canadian Constitution. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/law/9780190664817.003.0031

This chapter is about the interpretation of section 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Section 1 allows ‘limits’ to constitutional rights insofar as they are reasonable and justified in a free and democratic society. It asks the state for moral justification when a right has been infringed by state action. Moral justification has formal and substantive aspects; therefore the application of section 1 deploys a formal framework of proportionality nestled within a thin conception of liberal democratic political morality. The chapter also addresses the relative moral importance of the notion of ‘rights’, as well as the relevance of institutional considerations. It concludes that the section 1 framework follows a standard model of moral justification and cannot be significantly improved upon.

Hiebert, J. L. (2023). Compromise and the Notwithstanding Clause: Why the Dominant Narrative Distorts Our Understanding. In Contested Constitutionalism: Reflections on the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. (pp. 107–125). University of British Columbia Press. https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.59962/9780774816762-007/html

6 Compromise and the Notwithstanding Clause: Why the Dominant Narrative Distorts Our Understanding was published in Contested Constitutionalism on page 107.

View on www.degruyterbrill.com

National Symposium on Equality Rights Toronto), Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, & Gibson, D. (1986). Accentuating the Positive and Eliminating the Negative: Remedies for Inequality under the Canadian Charter. In L. Smith (Ed.), Righting the balance: Canada’s new equality rights (p. 311). Canadian Human Rights Reporter.

Evans, P. M., & Wekerle, G. R. (2016). The Shifting Terrain of Women’s Welfare: Theory, Discourse, and Activism. In Women and the Canadian Welfare State (pp. 3–27). University of Toronto Press. https://doi.org/10.3138/9781442683549-004

Côté, C.-E. (2023). Circulation et établissement. In S. Beaulac & J.-F. Gaudreault-DesBiens (Eds.), JurisClasseur Québec — Collection Droit public — Droit constitutionnel. LexisNexis. (Original work published 2011)

Harvey, C., & Schwartz, A. (2012). Independent or Dependent? Constitutional Courts in Divided Societies. In Rights in Divided Societies. Hart Publishing Limited.

Blache, P. (1996). Les libertés de circulation et d’établissement. In G. A. Beaudoin & E. Mendes (Eds.), The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (3d ed., pp. 8–1). Carswell.

Atak, I. (2025). L’article 6 de la Charte canadienne des droits et libertés: la liberté de circulation et d’établissement. In E. Mendes & S. Beaulac (Eds.), Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Sixth edition, p. 619). LexisNexis Canada Inc.

"More than forty years after the enactment of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, this landmark treatise examines the interpretation and application of the Charter by Canadian courts in both the private and criminal law spheres, as well as its impact on the Canadian legal system. Updated to reflect the most recent constitutional developments, Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 6th Edition + Charte canadienne des droits et libertés, 6e édition by Errol Mendes and Stéphane Beaulac offers a comprehensive review of the evolution of the Charter in the Canadian legal landscape.Since its first publication in 1982, this bilingual text has become an invaluable reference for constitutional law practitioners and students." --Publisher's website

Girard, M. ‑R. N. (2005). L’article 6 de la *Charte canadienne des droits et libertés*: la liberté de circulation et d’établissement — Un volcan dormant? In G. A. Beaudoin & E. Mendes (Eds.), The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (4th ed, p. 413). Carswell.

Keller, H., & Grover, L. (2012). General Comments of the Human Rights Committee and their legitimacy. In H. Keller, G. Ulfstein, & L. Grover (Eds.), UN human rights treaty bodies: law and legitimacy (p. 116). Cambridge University Press.

"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.

Sullivan, R. (2011). Côté’s Contribution to the Interpretation of Bilingual and Multilingual Legislation. In P.-A. Côté, M. Devinat, & S. Beaulac (Eds.), Interpretatio non cessat: mélanges en l’honneur de Pierre-André Côté = essays in honour of Pierre-André Côté. Éditions Y. Blais.

Dionne, P. (2005). La reconnaissance et la définition contemporaines des droits ancestraux: négocier ou s’adresser au juge? In G. Otis (Ed.), Droit, Territoire et Gouvernance des Peuples Autochtones. (1st ed., p. 71). Les Presses de l’Université Laval. https://doi.org/10.1515/9782763750330

McNeil, K. (2004). Continuity of Aboriginal Rights. In K. Wilkins & University of Alberta Centre for Constitutional Studies (Eds.), Advancing Aboriginal claims: visions, strategies, directions (p. 127). Purich Pub.

Romanow, R. (1985). Aboriginal Rights in the Constitutional Process. In M. Boldt, J. A. Long, & L. Little Bear (Eds.), Quest for justice: aboriginal peoples and aboriginal rights (p. 73). University of Toronto Press.

Lawrence, S. (2017). Equality and Anti-discrimination: The Relationship between Government Goals and Finding Discrimination in Section 15. In P. Oliver, P. Macklem, & N. Des Rosiers (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of the Canadian Constitution (p. 0). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/law/9780190664817.003.0039

This chapter considers the effect of section 1, the “justification” section of the Canadian Charter, on the doctrinal development of section 15, the equality section. It begins by describing the development of the section 15 substantive equality analysis, including the claim of a conceptually complete separation from the section 1 analysis of state justification. The chapter then identifies some features of section 15 which suggest that this separation is less than complete, including the existence of section 15(2), and anxieties over constraining government action. The chapter then turns to three post-2001 cases in which the Supreme Court of Canada found discrimination under the Charter but then held that discrimination was “justified” through section 1, and asks what these cases might reveal about the symbolic significance of a finding of discrimination and the Court’s struggle with institutional competence concerns in equality claims.

View on doi.org

Jackson, V. C. (2017). Proportionality and Equality. In V. C. Jackson & M. Tushnet (Eds.), Proportionality: New Frontiers, New Challenges. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316691724.009

Your search

Results 219 resources

Explore

Resource type

Publication year