Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
A quasi-constitutional law may be repealed or amended by means of an ordinary Act of the parliament or legislature, just like any other law. In this respect, therefore, such laws are not genuinely constitutional laws, which normally require some higher form of approval, such as the approval of multiple provincial legislatures, in order to be ...
The Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms is called quasi-constitutional because, according to section 52, no provision of any other Act passed by the Quebec National Assembly may derogate from sections 1 to 38, unless such Act expressly states that it applies despite the charter (roughly acting as an equivalent opt-out to the notwithstanding ...
Humphrey's Executor v. United States, 295 U.S. 602 (1935), was a Supreme Court of the United States case decided regarding whether the United States President has the power to remove executive officials of a quasi-legislative or quasi-judicial administrative body for reasons other than what is allowed by Congress. The Court held that the ...
Cover page for Israeli Constitution draft proposed by the Institute for Zionist Strategies. The State of Israel has an uncodified constitution.Instead of a formal written constitution, and in accordance with the Harari Decision (הַחְלָטַת הֲרָרִי ) of 13 June 1950 adopted by the Israeli Constituent Assembly (the First Knesset), the State of Israel has enacted several Basic ...
In Canadian law, it is possible for a law to be protected from implied repeal by way of a "primacy clause" which states that the act in question supersedes all other statutes until it is specifically repealed. Acts with such primacy clauses are called quasi-constitutional.
Pennoyer v. Neff, 95 U.S. 714 (1878), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court held that a state court can only exert personal jurisdiction over a party domiciled out-of-state if that party is served with process while physically present within the state.
The Quebec Resolutions, also known as the seventy-two resolutions, are a group of statements written at the Quebec Conference of 1864 which laid out the framework for the Canadian Constitution. They were adopted by the majority of the provinces of British North America , and became the basis for the London Conference of 1866 .
The "void for vagueness" legal doctrine does not apply to private law (that is, laws that govern rights and obligations as between private parties), only to laws that govern rights and obligations vis-a-vis the government. [citation needed] The doctrine also requires that to qualify as constitutional, a law must: [2]