Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Supreme Court of Canada is the court of last resort and final appeal in Canada. Cases successfully appealed to the Court are generally of national importance. Once a case is decided, the Court publishes written reasons for the decision, that consist of one or more opinions from any number of the nine justices.
The Supreme Court of Canada (SCC; French: Cour suprême du Canada, CSC) is the highest court in the judicial system of Canada. [2] It comprises nine justices, whose decisions are the ultimate application of Canadian law, and grants permission to between 40 and 75 litigants each year to appeal decisions rendered by provincial, territorial and federal appellate courts.
Following the Supreme Court's decisions in Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations, S.A. v. Brown (2011) and Daimler AG v. Bauman (2014), a company doing business on the Internet may be sued for any reason in the jurisdiction where it is "at home," typically its place of incorporation. [3]
Multani v Commission scolaire Marguerite‑Bourgeoys, [2006] 1 S.C.R. 256, 2006 SCC 6 is a decision by the Supreme Court of Canada in which the Court struck down an order of a Quebec school authority, that prohibited a Sikh child from wearing a kirpan to school, as a violation of freedom of religion under section 2(a) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Roncarelli v. Duplessis, [1959] S.C.R. 121, [1] was a landmark constitutional decision of the Supreme Court of Canada.The court held that in 1946 Maurice Duplessis, both Premier and Attorney General of Quebec, had overstepped his authority by ordering the manager of the Liquor Commission to revoke the liquor licence of Frank Roncarelli, a Montreal restaurant owner and Jehovah's Witness who was ...
United States v Cotroni [1989] 1 S.C.R. 1469 was a decision by the Supreme Court of Canada on extradition and freedom of movement under section 6 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Court found that extradition violates section 6 but is a justified infringement under section 1 of the Charter .
The practice began around 1979 by Chief Justice Bora Laskin, borrowing from the US Supreme Court practice of anonymizing certain unanimous decisions. [1] Unlike in the US, which uses it primarily for uncontroversial cases, in Canada, it is used almost always for important and controversial cases. [2]
Guindon v Canada, 2015 SCC 41 is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of Canada on the distinction between criminal and regulatory penalties, for the purposes of s.11 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It also provides guidance on when the Court will consider constitutional issues when such had not been argued in the lower courts.