Download Free Prime Minister Announces Nova Scotia Judicial Appointments Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online Prime Minister Announces Nova Scotia Judicial Appointments and write the review.

This publication is the latest in a series of steps to assist judges in carrying out their onerous responsibilities, and represents a concise yet comprehensive set of principles addressing the many difficult ethical issues that confront judges as they work and live in their communities. It also provides a sound basis to promote a more complete understanding of the role of the judge in society and of the ethical dilemmas they so often encounter. Sections of the publication cover the following: the purpose of the publication; judicial independence; integrity; diligence; equality; and impartiality, including judicial demeanour, civic and charitable activity, political activity, and conflicts of interest.
What should be the primary goals of a judicial appointments system, and how much weight should be placed on diversity in particular? Why is achieving a diverse judiciary across the UK taking so long? Is it time for positive action? What role should the current judiciary play in the appointment of our future judges? There is broad agreement within the UK and other common law countries that diversity raises important questions for a legal system and its officials, but much less agreement about the full implications of recognising diversity as an important goal of the judicial appointments regime. Opinions differ, for example, on the methods, forms, timing and motivations for judicial diversity. To mark the tenth anniversary of the creation of the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) in England and Wales, this collection includes contributions from current and retired judges, civil servants, practitioners, current and former commissioners on the JAC and leading academics from Australia, Canada, South Africa and across the UK. Together they provide timely and authoritative insights into past, current and future debates on the search for diversity in judicial appointments. Topics discussed include the role and responsibility of independent appointment bodies; assessments of the JAC’s first ten years; appointments to the UK Supreme Court; the pace of change; definitions of ‘merit’ and ‘diversity’; mandatory retirement ages; the use of ceiling quotas; and the appropriate role of judges and politicians in the appointments process.
The process by which Supreme Court judges are appointed is traditionally a quiet affair, but this certainly wasn’t the case when Prime Minister Stephen Harper selected Justice Marc Nadon for appointment to Canada’s highest court. Here, for the first time, is the complete story of “the Nadon Reference” – one of the strangest sagas in Canadian legal history. Following the Prime Minister's announcement, controversy swirled and debate raged: as a federal court judge, was Marc Nadon eligible for one of the three seats traditionally reserved for Quebec? Then, in March 2014, the Supreme Court of Canada broke new ground in statutory interpretation and constitutional law when it released the Reference re Supreme Court Act, ss 5 and 6. With detailed historical and legal analysis, including never-before-published interviews, The Tenth Justice explains how the Nadon Reference came to be a case at all, the issues at stake, and its legacy.
The process used to select judges of the Supreme Court of Canada has provoked criticism from the start. Some observers argue the process - where the prime minister has unfettered discretion - suffers from a democratic deficit, but there is also disagreement regarding alternative methods of selection. The Democratic Dilemma: Reforming Canada's Supreme Court explores the institutional features of the Court, whether the existing process used to select judges ought to be reformed, the overall legitimacy of the Court, as well as the selection and appointment processes of Supreme Court justices in other liberal democracies. This book will be of special interest to students and scholars of Canadian federalism, the judiciary, and comparative supreme courts. The Democratic Dilemma: Reforming Canada's Supreme Court is the second volume in the Institute of Intergovernmental Relations' Democratic Dilemma series. The first, The Democratic Dilemma: Reforming the Canadian Senate is edited by Jennifer Smith. Contributors include Arthur Benz (Technische Universität Darmstadt, Germany), Jorge O. Bercholc (Institute of Social and Legal Research Ambrosio L. Gioja), Eugénie Brouillet (Université Laval), Erin Crandall (McGill University), Neil Cruickshank (Algoma University), F.C. DeCoste (University of Alberta), Yonatan Fessha (University of the Western Cape, South Africa), Peter W. Hogg (Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP), Eike-Christian Hornig (Technische Universität Darmstadt, Germany), Allan C. Hutchinson York University), Achim Hurrelmann (Carleton University), Andrée Lajoie (Université de Montréal), Martin Manolov (Human Resources and Skills Development Canada), Aman McLeod (Rutgers University), Peter McCormick (University of Lethbridge), Peter Oliver (University of Ottawa), Yves Tanguay (CRIDAQ), Alan Trench (solicitor, England and Wales), and Nadia Verrelli (Algoma University and Queen's University).
This collection examines case-based reasoning in constitutional adjudication; that is, how courts decide on constitutional cases by referring to their own prior case law and the case law of other national, foreign, and international courts. Argumentation based on judicial authority is now fundamental to the resolution of constitutional disputes. At the same time, it is the most common form of reasoning used by courts. This volume shows not only the strengths and weaknesses of such argumentation, but also its serious methodological shortcomings. The book is comparative in nature, with individual chapters examining similar problems that different courts have resolved in different ways. The research covers three types of courts; namely the civil law constitutional courts of Germany, Italy, Poland, Lithuania, and Hungary; the common law supreme courts of the United States, Canada, and Australia; and the European international courts represented by the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union. The authors are distinguished scholars from various countries who specialise in constitutional justice issues. This book will be of interest to legal theorists and practitioners, and will be especially insightful for constitutional court judges. The Open Access version of this book, available at www.taylorfrancis.com, has been made available under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives 4.0 license.
Prepared to coincide with the 250th anniversary of the establishment of Nova Scotia's Supreme Court, this important new volume provides a comprehensive history of the institution, Canada's oldest common law court. The thirteen essays include an account of the first meeting in 1754 of the court in Michaelmas Term, surveys of jurisprudence (the court's early federalism cases; its use of American law; attitudes to the administrative state), and chapters on the courts of Westminster Hall, on which the Supreme Court was modelled, and the various courthouses it has occupied. Anchoring the volume are two longer chapters, one on the pre-confederation period and one on the modern period. Editors Philip Girard, Jim Phillips, and Barry Cahill have put together the first complete history of any Canadian provincial superior court. All of the essays are original, and many offer new interpretations of familiar themes in Canadian legal history. They take the reader through the establishment of the one-judge court to the present day – a unique contribution to our understanding of superior courts.
Canadians are told that provincial premiers wield considerable sway. Critics decry premiers as autocrats and dictators, while supporters label them as altruists and great leaders. In Newfoundland and Labrador the premier is expected to be the province's overlord, a patriotic defender of provincial interests, and the decision-maker who brokers competing policy priorities. But does a premier have as much power over government policy decisions as is popularly believed? First among Unequals, a detailed enquiry into the administration of Premier Danny Williams and the first year of his successor Kathy Dunderdale, suggests that the power of the premier is exaggerated by the media, critics, political parties, the public service, and the leaders themselves. With perspectives from economics, education, geography, health policy, history, and political science, contributors explore how dominant Williams was and test theories to show how power operates in provincial governments. They examine politics and government through case studies of the healthcare sectors, education, the fisheries, rural and regional development, hydroelectric projects, and the labour market. Focusing on an era of political populism and rapid economic growth, First among Unequals reasons that there is not enough evidence to suggest that the Premier's Office - even with someone like Danny Williams at the helm - independently shapes public policy. Contributors include Karlo Basta (Memorial), Sean Cadigan (Memorial), Angela Carter (Waterloo), Christopher Dunn (Memorial), Jim Feehan (Memorial), Gerald Galway (Memorial), Ryan Gibson (Memorial), James Kelly (Concordia), Royce Koop (Manitoba), Mario Levesque (Mount Allison), Maria Mathews (Memorial), John Peters (Laurentian), Michelle Porter (Memorial), Kate Puddister (McGill), Valérie Vézina (UQAM), and Kelly Vodden (Memorial, Grenfell).
The Honourable Fred Kaufman has been a distinguished figure in Canadian law for a half century. Born into a middle-class Jewish family in mid-1920s Vienna, Kaufman escaped to England on the eve of the Second World War. In 1940, he was interned as an 'enemy alien' and sent to Canada. Released in 1942, Kaufman stayed in Canada where he went on to university and law school in Montreal. Kaufman was called to the Bar of Quebec in 1955 and practiced criminal law for eighteen years, taking part in many of the famous cases of that period. In 1960, he secured the release of a young Pierre Elliott Trudeau from prison, and in 1973, Trudeau returned the favour by personally informing Kaufman of his appointment to the Quebec Court of Appeal, where he served for eighteen years, including one as Acting Chief Justice of Quebec. Since his retirement in 1991, Kaufman has led numerous commissions and inquiries, most notably the investigation into the wrongful conviction of Guy Paul Morin and the two-year reassessment of the Steven Truscott case. Searching for Justice is Kaufman's remarkable story in his own words. It is the tale of adversity overcome in a crucial period of Canadian legal history.