Your search

The adversary system of trial, now the defining feature of Anglo-American criminal procedure, developed late in English legal history. For centuries, defendants were forbidden to have trial counsel. Prosecution counsel was allowed but seldom used. The criminal trial was meant to be a lawyer-free occasion at which the defendant could hear the accusing evidence and respond to it in person. The transformation from lawyer-free to lawyer-dominated criminal trials happened within the space of about a century, from the 1690s to the 1780s. This book explains how the lawyers captured the trial. In addition to conventional legal sources, the book draws upon a rich vein of contemporary pamphlet accounts about trials in London’s Old Bailey. The book also mines these novel sources to provide the first detailed account of the formation of the law of criminal evidence. Responding to menacing prosecutorial initiatives (notably reward-seeking thieftakers and crown witnesses testifying to save their own necks), the judges of the 1730s decided to allow the defendant to have counsel to cross-examine accusing witnesses. By restricting defense counsel to the work of examining and cross-examining witnesses, the judges intended that the accused would still need to respond in person to the charges against him. But defense counsel manipulated the dynamics of adversary procedure to defeat the judges’ design, ultimately silencing the accused and transforming the very purpose of the criminal trial. Trial ceased to be an opportunity for the accused to speak, and became instead an occasion for defense counsel to test the prosecution case.

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

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

The important aspects of human wellbeing outlined in human rights instruments and constitutional bills of rights can only be adequately secured as and when they are rendered the object of specific rights and corresponding duties. It is often assumed that the main responsibility for specifying the content of such genuine rights lies with courts. Legislated Rights: Securing Human Rights through Legislation argues against this assumption, by showing how legislatures can and should be at the centre of the practice of human rights. This jointly authored book explores how and why legislatures, being strategically placed within a system of positive law, can help realise human rights through modes of protection that courts cannot provide by way of judicial review.

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

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

In August 2016 Colten Boushie, a twenty-two-year-old Cree man from Red Pheasant First Nation, was fatally shot on a Saskatchewan farm by white farmer Gerald Stanley. In a trial that bitterly divided Canadians, Stanley was acquitted of both murder and manslaughter by a jury in Battleford with no visible Indigenous representation. In Canadian Justice, Indigenous Injustice Kent Roach critically reconstructs the Gerald Stanley/Colten Boushie case to examine how it may be a miscarriage of justice. Roach provides historical, legal, political, and sociological background to the case including misunderstandings over crime when Treaty 6 was negotiated, the 1885 hanging of eight Indigenous men at Fort Battleford, the role of the RCMP, prior litigation over Indigenous underrepresentation on juries, and the racially charged debate about defence of property, self-defence, guns, and rural crime. Drawing on both trial transcripts and research on miscarriages of justice, Roach looks at jury selection, the controversial "hang fire" defence, how the credibility and beliefs of Indigenous witnesses were challenged on the stand, and Gerald Stanley's implicit appeals to self-defence and defence of property, as well as the decision not to appeal the acquittal. Concluding his study, Roach asks whether Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's controversial call to "do better" is possible, given similar cases since Stanley's, the difficulty of reforming the jury or the RCMP, and the combination of Indigenous underrepresentation on juries and overrepresentation among those victimized and accused of crimes. Canadian Justice, Indigenous Injustice is a searing account of one case that provides valuable insight into criminal justice, racism, and the treatment of Indigenous peoples in Canada.

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

This volume covers the years 1483-1558, a period of immense social, political, and intellectual changes, which profoundly affected the law and its workings. It first considers constitutional developments, and addresses the question of whether there was a rule of law under king Henry VIII. In a period of supposed despotism, and enhanced parliamentary power, protection of liberty was increasing and habeas corpus was emerging. The volume considers the extent to which the lawwas affected by the intellectual changes of the Renaissance, and how far the English experience differed from that of the Co

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

Even though s-s. 92(14) of the Constitution Act, 1867 grants to the provinces a wide jurisdiction over the administration of justice, which includes the constitution and organization of courts, the case law has used s. 96 to limit its scope. This has had the effect of giving constitutional status to the judicial system in existence at the time of Confederation. On the other hand, the Parliament of Canada does not appear to have been subjected to the same constraints, allowing it to confer broad powers to the courts established under its jurisdiction. The only restrictions that seem to have been applied are in the fields of criminal and constitutional law and provincial concerns. Thus, the federal Parliament would be empowered to withdraw from superior courts any other matter within its legislative competence, as long as the jurisdiction is transferred to a s. 101 tribunal. This suggests that s. 96 protects superior courts mostly against provincial measures.

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…