Supreme Court of Canada

James Madison. Nullification theory is a belief that a state has the right to invalidate any federal law that was considered unconstitutional. The Constitution Convention continuously rejects to support this theory. They declared that only the federal courts had the right to void a law. The Nullification Theory is important because of the Kentucky and Virginia Resolution in 1798, the Nullification Crisis, and the Slave and Segregation laws. All those events started a…

The case became well known and reached the Supreme Court of Canada because of an incident between the Crown and the Acting Assistant Deputy Minister (hereinafter referred to as the ADM). The Crown made the decision to enter into a plea agreement with the accused, however, the ADM believed the plea bargain itself would bring the administration of justice into disrepute and thus needed to be withdrawn. This led to the case making its way to the Supreme Court level claiming the withdrawal of a plea…

support. Esson C.J. of the Supreme Court of British Columbia accepted that there was widespread prejudice that could cause bias in the jurors against Williams, however did not accept that this bias created “a reasonable possibility of partiality sufficient to support a challenge for cause.” He did not consider that a juror would be influenced by any such bias when carrying out the “solemn duty of deciding whether the accused is guilty of the crime charged” . The B.C. Court of Appeal held that…

commencing legislation. The president may veto a law passed by Congress but, Congress can override that veto with a vote of two-thirds of both houses. Another example would be that the Supreme Court may check Congress by declaring a law unconstitutional. The power is equalized by the fact that members of the Supreme Court are selected by the president, those appointments have to be approved by Congress as…

1812 the worst fought war in America. First off, The United States Capitol was burnt down by the British and everything was destroyed except a picture of George Washington and The Colonial Flag. The United States believed that they were going to win Canada 's land and they weren’t able too. The war ended in a tie because they were extremely focused on the French Revolution and Napoleon. Issues within the country also created conflict with the American people. New England for example wanted to…

487.055 violating ss. 7, 8, 11(h) and 11(i) were dismissed by the Ontario Supreme Court of Justice. Their decision went 4-3 as the majority held that the collection of DNA was in fact legal and did not interfere with the constitution. He appealed this judgement requiring it to go through the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal heard the case and decided that s.487.055 is valid under the circumstances in this case and under the constitution. However…

the mandatory application of the exclusionary rule. It begins by stating that the Supreme Court intends on limiting the usage of the exclusionary rule, making it only applicable to cases that grossly violate a defendant’s fourth amendment rights. By citing prolific court cases as references, this article backs up this position by showing what has and has not worked in previous cases. In many cases, the Supreme Court has ruled that the exclusionary rule is not mandatorily applicable, so long as…

R. v. Keegstra, was basically a hatred against an identifiable group case which Supreme Court of Canada made a decision on it based on the section 2(b) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. James Keegstra was a public school teacher in Eckville, Alberta . In 1984, James Keegstra was charged under section 319(2) for "promoting hatred against an identifiable group by communicating anti-Semitic statements to his students ". In his classes, he would describe Jews as a kind of people who “created…

B. Chef Curry’s Covenant Not to Compete Is Likely Unenforceable Because It Does Not Meet All Four Elements of Enforceability. If chefs are considered professionals, Alabama courts will only enforce a noncompetition agreement when an employer has a protectable interest, the restriction is reasonably related to that interest, the restriction is reasonable in time and place, and the restriction imposes no undue hardship upon the employee. All four of these elements must be found, otherwise the…

years after Superior Court judges agreed with defense arguments that the interrogation and testimony by child witnesses was tainted. Handing a major victory to defense in one of the country's longest-running day-care sexual abuse cases, a massachusetts judge ruled today that the children in the case had been so manipulated in interviews with investigators that their testimony was “forever tainted.” The prosecution will appeal the ruling to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, Ms. Rooney…