Advocates for the Rule of Law
The Supreme Court of Canada’s freshly released Ledcor Construction Ltd. v. Northbridge Indemnity Insurance Co. ...
Read More »Featured
-
The Decisions to Reject Trinity Western were not “Prescribed by Law”
-
Wilson v. AECL: A Missed Opportunity to Protect the Rule of Law in Administrative Law
-
R. v. Jordan is Judicial Legislation
-
!["[T]here may be a range of sixty colours, each of which is so little different from its neighbour that it is difficult to make any distinction between the two, and yet at the one end of the range the colour may be white and at the other end of the range black...Useful as decided cases are, it is always advisable to get back to the words of the Act itself and to remember the object with which it was passed." - Lord Sankey, Aeronautics Reference](http://www.ruleoflaw.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Sixty-Colours-70x70.jpg)
Seven’s Wonders and Sixty Colours: More on the Interpretation of Section 7
-
Asher Honickman and John Sikkema Publish in Law Matters
-
Constraint and Candour
-
The Comeau Decision is a Welcome Example of Serious Doctrinal Analysis
-
Reaffirming the Case for Constraint: A Reply to Léonid Sirota
Commentary
The Decisions to Reject Trinity Western were not “Prescribed by Law”
This article appears in the current (Fall 2016) edition of the Christian Legal Journal, a ...
Read More »!["[T]here may be a range of sixty colours, each of which is so little different from its neighbour that it is difficult to make any distinction between the two, and yet at the one end of the range the colour may be white and at the other end of the range black...Useful as decided cases are, it is always advisable to get back to the words of the Act itself and to remember the object with which it was passed." - Lord Sankey, Aeronautics Reference](http://www.ruleoflaw.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Sixty-Colours-300x160.jpg)
Seven’s Wonders and Sixty Colours: More on the Interpretation of Section 7
In my last article, “Reaffirming the Case for Constraint“, I replied to Leonid Sirota’s article ...
Read More »
Constraint and Candour
This article is written in response to Asher Honickman’s recent article, “Reaffirming the Case for ...
Read More »
The Comeau Decision is a Welcome Example of Serious Doctrinal Analysis
Constitutional law and alcohol are forever linked. Many famous distribution of powers cases giving rise ...
Read More »Articles
-
The Correct Approach to Contractual Interpretation
The Supreme Court of Canada’s freshly released Ledcor Construction Ltd. v. Northbridge Indemnity Insurance Co. ...
Read More » -
Wilson v. AECL: A Missed Opportunity to Protect the Rule of Law in Administrative Law
-
R. v. Jordan is Judicial Legislation
-
Election Promises and Marijuana Policy: What Federalism Has to Offer
-
Brexit and the Rule of Law
-
The Supreme Court is Eroding the Bedrock Principle of Stare Decisis
-
Constitutional Originalism is a Canadian Staple
ARL News
-
Asher Honickman and John Sikkema Publish in Law Matters
The Summer 2016 edition of Law Matters, a publication of the Canadian Bar Association (Alberta ...
Read More » -
Joanna Baron Weighs in on the Right to a Speedy Trial on the CBC
-
ARL’s New Logo
-
Runnymede Society Student Leadership Conference 2016
-
Runnymede Spring Tour Update and Website!
-
State Regulation or Markets?
-
Promoting the Runnymede Society