Your search

Federal elections between 2008 and 2019 saw a great of volatility in Quebec, with important consequences for election outcomes. The surge in New Democratic Party (NDP) support in Quebec led the party to official opposition, while Liberal gains in 2011 led the party to a majority government, and Bloc Québécois gains in 2019 helped to reduce the Liberals to a minority. To what extent was this volatility driven by voters switching parties and to what degree was it driven by voters entering and exiting the electorate? This article uses ecological inference based on riding-level data to examine the dynamics of party competition in Quebec from 2008 to 2019. We show that while voter mobilization mattered to volatility, vote switching was the important driver of changing party fortunes during this period., RésuméLes élections fédérales entre 2008 et 2019 ont connu une grande volatilité au Québec, avec des conséquences importantes sur les résultats électoraux. La poussée du soutien du NPD au Québec a conduit le parti à l'opposition officielle, tandis que les gains des libéraux en 2011 ont conduit le parti à un gouvernement majoritaire et que les gains du Bloc Québécois en 2019 ont contribué à réduire les libéraux à une minorité. Dans quelle mesure cette volatilité est-elle due au fait que les électeurs changent de parti et dans quelle mesure est-elle due au fait que les électeurs entrent et sortent de l'électorat ? Cet article utilise l'inférence écologique basée sur des données au niveau des circonscriptions pour examiner la dynamique de la concurrence entre les partis au Québec de 2008 à 2019. Nous montrons que, bien que la mobilisation des électeurs ait joué un rôle dans la volatilité, le changement de parti a été le principal moteur de l'évolution de la situation des partis au cours de cette période.

A primary reference tool on the general principles and the particular aspects of common law damages, 'McGregor on Damages' is still the leading authority on damages and has been for over 50 years

This work offers a novel perspective on British elections, focusing on the role of electoral shocks in the context of increasing electoral volatility.

"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.

"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.

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

"Margaret Conrad's history of Canada begins with a challenge to its readers. What is Canada? What makes up this diverse, complex, and often contested nation-state? What was its founding moment? And who are its people? Drawing on her many years of experience as a scholar, writer, and teacher of Canadian history, Conrad offers astute answers to these difficult questions. Beginning in Canada's deep past with the arrival of its Indigenous peoples, she traces its history through the conquest by Europeans, the American Revolutionary War, and the industrialization of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, to its prosperous present. As a social historian, Conrad emphasizes the peoples' history: the relationships between Indigenous peoples and settlers, French and English, Catholic and Protestant, rich and poor. She writes of the impact of disease, how women fared in the early colonies, and the social transformations that took place after the Second World War as Canada began to assert itself as an independent nation. It is this grounded approach that drives the narrative and makes for compelling reading. In its final chapters, the author explains the social, economic, and political upheavals that have bedeviled the nation in recent years. Despite its successes and its popularity as a destination for immigrants from across the world, Canada remains a cautious and contested country. This intelligent, concise, and lucid book explains just why that is"-- Provided by publisher.

L’article 2926.1 CcQ rend imprescriptibles les actions civiles liées aux violences sexuelles, conjugales et infantiles, dans la mesure où elles constituent un préjudice corporel. Or, le critère du préjudice corporel qu’impose cet article soulève plusieurs enjeux lorsqu’il s’agit de déterminer quelles victimes de violences sexuelles, conjugales et infantiles peuvent bénéficier de l’imprescriptibilité de leur action en réparation. Ces enjeux découlent d’une incertitude entourant le concept de préjudice corporel, dont la définition exige qu’un certain seuil soit dépassé pour qu’un acte sur le corps soit considéré comme une atteinte à l’intégrité physique.

Personal autonomy is a constitutive element of all rights. It confers upon a right-holder the power to decide whether, and under what circumstances, to exercise her right. Every right infringement thus invariably involves a violation of its holder’s autonomy. The autonomy violation consists of the deprivation of a right-holder of a choice that was rightfully hers – the choice as to how to go about her life. Harms resulting from the right’s infringement and from the autonomy violation are often readily distinguishable, as is the case when someone uses the property of a right-holder without securing her permission or, worse, causes her bodily injury. At other times, however, the two harms overlap, as in the case when a right-holder is unlawfully barred from exercising her free speech right or is denied the right to vote. Furthermore, the autonomy harm may sometimes exceed the physical harm sustained by the victim, as is the case in many sexual harassment incidents. At other times, however, the victim’s physical harm or economic loss will outweigh the autonomy harm, as is often the case in automobile accidents. Even though autonomy violations are omnipresent, and the harm resulting from them can be severe, the law rarely recognizes a cause of action for violations of autonomy, nor does it provide redress for autonomy harms. The current legal approach to autonomy protection can best be characterized as anomalous and unprincipled. Therefore, from a normative perspective, it is untenable. In this article, we set out to make three novel theoretical and doctrinal contributions. First, we advance a comprehensive jurisprudential account of the relationship between rights and autonomy. Second, we show why existing law should be replaced with a legal regime that respects and protects individual autonomy in all cases. Finally, we develop a remedial framework designed to address autonomy violations. Mindful of administrability constraints, we incorporate three limitations to ensure that our proposal does not overwhelm the court system: (a) suits for autonomy violations would only be allowed when the plaintiff has a cause of action originating from the defendant’s infringement of her recognized legal right; (b) any such suit would undergo a strict de minimis scrutiny; and (c) no double recovery would be allowed in cases in which the plaintiff’s autonomy harm is subsumed in her physical or economic loss.

Legislation has been updated up to Canada Gazette Vol 159: 19 (September10, 2025)