Search
Full bibliography 1,285 resources
-
THE issue of retroactive application of the ‘New York Convention of 1958 on the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards'’1 has already been raised in a number of cases and articles. While the latter tend to agree that the Convention was meant to apply retroactively2 the former show somewhat less homogeneity on that question.3 Nevertheless, this issue remains very much alive with respect to the ever increasing number of states acceding to the Convention. In the last five years, 50 new states have become parties to the Convention, raising the total number to 83 member states.4The Convention contains no explicit reference to its retroactive application nor is its history conclusive on this issue.5 Some implementing statutes of the Convention deal expressly with its temporal application. Indeed, at least five of them state expressly a date from which the Convention is applicable.6 On the other hand, at least two others state expressly that the Convention applies without any restriction in time.7
-
In Andrews v. The Law Society of B.C., the Supreme Court of Canada makes its first significant statement concerning the right to equality in subsection 15(1) of the Canadian Charter of Rights. The Court holds, by a margin of 4 to 2, that the provision in the B.C. Barristers and Solicitors Act, which made citizenship a requirement for membership in the Law Society, violates subsection 15(1) of the Charter and cannot be justified under the terms of section 1. In reaching this conclusion, the Court adopts a broad approach to subsection 15(1), which focusses on the effect or impact of particular laws on disadvantaged groups within the community. In taking this view of the right to equality, the Court has set itself a difficult task - because while the focus of review is on a state act that disadvantages a particular group, the foundation of the wrong is the disadvantaged or unequal position of the group in the community. The court’s pursuit of systemic equality, though, is constrained by the adjudicative process and perhaps also by the court’s reluctance to recognize the full implications of the conception of equality underlying the prohibition of effects discrimination. The Court is caught between two views of equality and state obligation: one view emphasizes the correction of harmful state action through the adjudicative process; the other emphasizes distributive justice and places an obligation on the state to address or take account of socio-economic inequality in the community. The focus in future cases will be on the standards used for determining whether a group is "disadvantaged", whether a law's impact is "disparate" and whether the "limit" on the right under section 1 is "reasonable". The standards adopted by the Court will determine the depth of judicial intervention into the socio-economic organization of society. Future cases may give greater substance and clarity to these tests. However, inasmuch as they represent a compromise between two visions of equality and state obligation, these standards are likely to remain unstable. The scope of the right to equality will remain open, flexible and controversial, with no clear lines or easy tests for fixing the limits of judicial intervention into the social and economic order.
Explore
Author / Editor
- Ali Hammoudi (14)
- Anneke Smit (29)
- Annette Demers (19)
- Beverly Jacobs (34)
- Brian Manarin (15)
- Christopher Waters (61)
- Claire Mummé (22)
- Dan Rohde (6)
- Danardo Jones (16)
- Daniel Del Gobbo (39)
- David Tanovich (112)
- Gemma Smyth (43)
- Irina Ceric (23)
- Jasminka Kalajdzic (73)
- Jeff Berryman (64)
- Jillian Rogin (10)
- Joshua Sealy-Harrington (47)
- Kristen Thomasen (32)
- Laverne Jacobs (71)
- Lisa Trabucco (3)
- Margaret Liddle (4)
- Meris Bray (6)
- Mita Williams (10)
- Muharem Kianieff (18)
- Myra Tawfik (24)
- Noel Semple (90)
- Pascale Chapdelaine (43)
- Paul Ocheje (12)
- Reem Bahdi (53)
- Richard Moon (94)
- Ruth Kuras (5)
- Sara Wharton (17)
- Shanthi E. Senthe (8)
- Sujith Xavier (49)
- Sylvia Mcadam (6)
- Tess Sheldon (40)
- Valerie Waboose (4)
- Vasanthi Venkatesh (21)
- Vicki Jay Leung (9)
- Vincent Wong (22)
- Wissam Aoun (28)
Resource type
- Audio Recording (2)
- Blog Post (34)
- Book (96)
- Book Section (161)
- Conference Paper (8)
- Document (10)
- Film (3)
- Journal Article (509)
- Magazine Article (53)
- Newspaper Article (17)
- Preprint (336)
- Report (13)
- Thesis (37)
- Video Recording (6)
Publication year
- Between 1900 and 1999 (79)
-
Between 2000 and 2026
(1,206)
- Between 2000 and 2009 (249)
- Between 2010 and 2019 (578)
- Between 2020 and 2026 (379)