• Categories
    • Constitutional law
      • Federalism
      • Law of Democracy
      • Law and Religion
    • Constitutional Theory
    • Legal philosophy
    • Political philosophy
      • Power Corrupts
    • The Justice System
    • Criminal Law/Policy
    • Administrative Law
    • New Technologies
    • History
    • Law and economics
    • Literature
    • Uncategorized
  • About
    • About the Blog
    • About Leonid Sirota
    • About Mark Mancini
  • Home
Double Aspect

Double Aspect

Canadian public law and other exciting things


  • December 23, 2019

    Vavilov: A Note on Remedy

      With all of the discussion of Vavilov’s revised standard of review analysis, one aspect of the decision has gone somewhat unnoticed: the renewed focus on the remedy in judicial review proceedings. I write today to discuss this “development” in the Canadian law of judicial review. While the Court certainly applied existing principles in declining

    Continue reading

    Administrative Law
    Administrative Law, judicial review, remedy
  • December 20, 2019

    Not Good Enough

    The Supreme Court re-writes the law of judicial review in Canada, but not nearly well enough.

    Continue reading

    Administrative Law, Constitutional law
    deference, judicial review, reasonableness, Rule of Law, standard of review, statutory interpretation, Supreme Court of Canada
  • December 20, 2019

    Canada Post: Vavilov’s First Day in the Sun

    Vavilov didn’t have to wait long to have its first day in the sun. In Canada Post Corp v Canadian Union of Postal Workers, 2019 SCC 67 (a 7-2 opinion, Abella and Martin JJ dissenting), the Court had its first crack at applying the revised standard of review framework set out in Vavilov. In my

    Continue reading

    Administrative Law
    Administrative Law, judicial review, Vavilov
  • December 19, 2019

    Vavilov: A Step Forward

    **This post originally appeared on Advocates for the Rule of Law** Today, the Supreme Court of Canada released its decisions in Vavilov and Bell/NFL. I have previously summarized the facts of these cases and analyzed them here (Vavilov) and here (Bell/NFL). Overall, today’s decisions (a 7-2 decision, Abella and Karakatsanis JJ concurring in result) are

    Continue reading

    Administrative Law
    Administrative Law, judicial review, Vavilov
  • December 4, 2019

    Because It’s (The End of) 2019: Focusing on Legislative Meaning in Judicial Review

    For Canadian legal watchers, specifically administrative law aficionados, 2019 has been a year of frustration and “confusion and contestation.” On one hand, we await guidance from the Supreme Court in Vavilov and Bell/NFL regarding the standard of review of administrative action. In other ways, we have seen interesting trends from the Supreme Court on other

    Continue reading

    Administrative Law
    Administrative Law, judicial review, standard of review
  • November 28, 2019

    Constructive Shooting

    How to evaluate New Brunswick’s use of the Charter’s “notwithstanding clause.”

    Continue reading

    Constitutional law, Constitutional Theory
    Charter, notwithstanding clause, rights and freedoms
  • November 25, 2019

    Shooting Gallery

    A proposed invocation of the Charter’s “notwithstanding clause” in New Brunswick is misguided and disturbing

    Continue reading

    Constitutional law
    Canada, Charter, New Brunswick, notwithstanding clause, politics
  • November 14, 2019

    Rafilovich: A Textualist (or Quasi-Textualist) Turn?

    Since Telus v Wellman, the Supreme Court of Canada has moved towards a sort of “textually constrained” purposivism in statutory interpretation cases. To my mind, textually constrained purposivism involves two parts: (1) a focus on the text over abstract purposes in determining the meaning of text and (2) if there are conflicting purposes at the

    Continue reading

    Constitutional law, Criminal Law/Policy, The Justice System
    criminal law, statutory interpretation
  • November 7, 2019

    R v King: Creative Remedies

    On September 19, 2019, certain new amendments to the Criminal Code took effect. Those amendments, among other things, repealed s. 634 of the Criminal Code, which enshrined the statutory right to peremptory challenges of potential jurors (as opposed to challenges for cause). The bill in question replaced s.634 with a new provision that allowed expanded

    Continue reading

    Constitutional law, Criminal Law/Policy
    criminal code, criminal law, remedies
  • November 4, 2019

    Heresy!

    The UK Supreme Court’s decision in “the Case of Prorogations” and the political constitution

    Continue reading

    Constitutional law, Constitutional Theory
    constitutional conventions, prorogation, United Kingdom
«Previous Page Next Page»

Recent Posts

  • Truth about Allegiance
  • New Stuff
  • Voldemortion
  • La leçon du Père Bourgeois
  • Mémoire
  • Notwithstanding Myths
  • “I’m from the New Right and I’m Here to Help”
  • Whiplash
  • How to Make a “Constitution”
  • Ceci n’est pas une constitution

Get the posts by email


Recent Posts

  • Truth about Allegiance
  • New Stuff
  • Voldemortion

Follow Me

Tumblr

WordPress

Instagram

Newsletter

Website Powered by WordPress.com.

  • Subscribe Subscribed
    • Double Aspect
    • Join 350 other subscribers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • Double Aspect
    • Subscribe Subscribed
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar