Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The government need only be a participant or complicit in the conduct threatening the right, where the violation must be a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the government actions. [6] Section 7 has not been interpreted to convey positive rights nor has it been interpreted to impose any positive obligations upon the government. However, the ...
A government actor consists of institutions for which the government has statutory authority to exercise substantial control over the day-to-day operations, policy-making, and as well provides substantial funding for the institutions. The main question to ask is how much control the government has over the institution:
Among other things, section 24 seems to give judges the power to place positive obligations upon a government, [2] as well as to enforce more imaginative remedies. An example of an imaginative remedy can be found in the landmark case Doucet-Boudreau , (2003) 3 S.C.R. 3, as the claimants challenged the Nova Scotia government's delay in building ...
[16]: 270 As Canada had a parliamentary system of government, and as judges were perceived not to have enforced rights well in the past, it was questioned whether the courts should be named as the enforcers of the Charter, as Trudeau wanted. Conservatives argued that elected politicians should be trusted instead.
The Canadian government said on Tuesday that its global affairs department suffered a data breach and that there was unauthorized access to personal information of users including employees.
In R. v. Nova Scotia Pharmaceutical Society the Supreme Court of Canada found that an open-ended statute (prohibiting companies from "unduly" lessening competition) was not a breach of Section 11(a). In R. v. Delaronde (1997), the Supreme Court of Canada found section 11 (a) is meant not only to guarantee a fair trial but also to serve as an ...
The Emergencies Act (French: Loi sur les mesures d'urgence) is a statute passed by the Parliament of Canada in 1988 which authorizes the Government of Canada to take extraordinary temporary measures to respond to public welfare emergencies, public order emergencies, international emergencies and war emergencies.
The government appealed that decision to the Supreme Court of Canada. Since the Court of Appeal decision was still the statement of law at the time of the SGEU Dispute Settlement Act, a clause was written into the act, invoking the section 33 override.