Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-p2v8j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-06T06:54:00.823Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Critics of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council: The New Orthodoxy and an Alternative Explanation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 November 2009

Frederick Vaughan
Frederick Vaughan
Affiliation:
University of Guelph
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

By way of a critical assessment of the leading authorities on the critics of the Judicial Committee, this article argues that the proper appreciation of what the law lords did to the terms of the BNA Act can be found in an understanding of their perception of their unique function. Supporters of the Judicial Committee's decentralization of the terms of the British North America Act have tended to rely on either G. P. Browne's book on the subject or Alan Cairns's article in this Journal (4 [1971], 301–45). The purpose of this article is to challenge those authorities and offer an alternative explanation.

Résumé

En s'interrogeant sur le bien-fondé des commentaires que les auteurs les mieux renseignés ont faits au sujet du Comité judiciaire du Conseil privé britannique. cet article cherche à situer dans son juste contexte l'attitude des lords à l'égard de l'Acte de l'Amérique du Nord britannique. Pour sa part, l'auteur estime qu'il faut avant tout comprendre la perception que les membres du Comité judiciaire ont de leur propre fonction. Cette perspective entraíne donc une remise en question des interprétations traditionnelles, notamment celles des auteurs qui, s'appuyant sur l'ouvrage de G. P. Browne ou sur l'article d'Alan Cairns dans cette Revue en 1971, se sont faits les partisans des positions décentralisatrices du Comité judiciaire.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique , Volume 19 , Issue 3 , September 1986 , pp. 495 - 519
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Political Science Association (l'Association canadienne de science politique) and/et la Société québécoise de science politique 1986

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 “The Judicial Committee and Its Critics.” this JOURNAL 4 (1971), 301–45.Google Scholar

2 Browne, G. P., The Judicial Committee and the British North America Act (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1967).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3 See for example his response to Laskin, ibid., 127 and 128.

4 Ibid., 28.

4 Kennedy, W. P. M., “The British North America Act: Past and Future,” Canadian Bar Review 15 (1937), 393.Google Scholar

6 O'Connor, W. F., Report to the Senate of Canada (Ottawa: King's Printer, 1939).Google Scholar

7 MacDonald, V. C., “Judicial Interpretation of the Canadian Constitution,” University of Toronto Law Journal 1 (1935–1936), 260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

8 Laskin, Bora, “‘Peace, Order and Good Government’ Re-examined,” Canadian Bar Review 25 (1947), 1054.Google Scholar

9 Browne depends almost exclusively on Cross, R., Precedent in English Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1961).Google Scholar

10 Browne, , The Judicial Committee, 28.Google Scholar

11 See Argument in Privy Council, Russell v. the Queen (London, 1882)Google Scholar. This document is a printed version of the shorthand notes of the proceedings by Messrs. Martin and Meredith.

12 See Laskin's, Bora review in Canadian Public Administration 10 (1967), 514Google Scholar; Gibson, Dale in Canadian Bar Review 44 (1968), 153Google Scholar; Corry, J. A. in this JOURNAL 1 (1968), 268Google Scholar; Blache, Pierre in Alberta Law Review 6 (1968), 146Google Scholar; and Russell, Peter in Canadian Historical Review 48 (1968), 66.Google Scholar

13 Black, Edwin R. and Cairns, Alan C., “A Different Perspective on Canadian Federalism,” Canadian Public Administration 9 (1966), 27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

14 Cairns, , “The Judicial Committee and Its Critics,” 344.Google Scholar

15 Ibid., 330.

16 Toronto Electric Commissioners v. Snider (1925) AC396 [Olmsted 11], 409.

17 (3rd ed.; Ottawa: Carleton University Press, 1982).

18 Godwin, William, Enquiry concerning Political Justice (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1971), 234.Google Scholar

19 Russell, Peter H., “A Democratic Approach to Civil Liberties,” in Vaughan, Frederick et al. (eds.), Contemporary Issues in Canadian Politics (Scarborough: Prentice-Hall, 1970), 95.Google Scholar

20 Russell, , “A Democratic Approach,” 97.Google Scholar

21 Russell, , “Introduction,” Leading Constitutional Decisions, 12.Google Scholar Emphasis in the original.

22 Russell, , “Introduction,” 13.Google Scholar

23 Alexander Galt, Sherbrook Speech, 1865, P.A.C. For a good discussion of John A. Macdonald's influence on the Canadian constitution, see Forsey, Eugene, “Macdonald's Constitution.” Dalhousie Law Journal 3 (1976), 529.Google Scholar

24 Kyer, Clifford Ian, “Has History a Role to Play in Constitutional Adjudication? Some Preliminary Considerations.” The Law Society Gazette 15 (1981), 135.Google Scholar

25 PEI Debates (1865), 60.

26 PEI Debutes (1865), 65.

27 Mallory, J. R., Social Credit and the Federal Power in Canada (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1954), 47ff.Google Scholar

28 Argument in Privy Council: Russell v. The Queen (Whitehall, 1882)Google Scholar [Transcript from the shorthand notes of Messrs, Martin and Meredith].

29 The Liquor Prohibition Appeal (1895), An Appeal from the Supreme Court of Canada to Her Majesty The Queen in Council (London: Wm. Brown & Co., 1895)Google Scholar [Transcript from the shorthand notes of Messrs. Martin and Meredith].

30 Wexler, Stephen, “The Urge to Idealize: Viscount Haldane and the Constitution of Canada.” McGill Law Journal 29 (1984), 609–50.Google Scholar

31 Follett, M. P., The New State (London: Longmans, Green, 1926).Google Scholar

32 Follett, , “Introduction by Viscount Haldane,” viii.Google Scholar

33 Haldane, Viscount, “The Work for the Empire of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council,” Cambridge Law Review 1 (1923), 148.Google Scholar Italics added.

34 Haldane, Viscount, “Lord Watson,” Juridical Review 11 (1899), 278.Google Scholar

35 MacGuigan, Mark, “Precedent and Policy in the Supreme Court of Canada,” Canadian Bar Review 45 (1967), 627.Google Scholar

36 Robinson, Jonathon, “Lord Haldane and the British North America Act,” University of Toronto Law Journal 20 (1970), 55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

37 Austin, John, The Province of Jurisprudence Determined (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1954), 191.Google Scholar