Quote:
Originally Posted by FireGilbert
Will the supreme court decision set any precedence in other Westminster democracies?
You'd have to think the Harper prorogation in 2008 would have been declared similarly illegal if challenged.
|
I expect to refer to the decision in the pending appeal in the Alberta Court of Appeal of this judgment regarding our fixed election date law:
https://www.canlii.org/en/ab/abqb/do...19abqb490.html
Oddly, there are technical arguments that because of the implementation of the Charter in 1982, Canada is stuck with constitutional relics that the UK itself can (and has) subsequently shed...including the idea that the Monarch can actually do anything other than what she is told by the PM (or in our case the Premier).
The 2008 Harper prorogation was challenged and upheld (on similar arguments lost by Boris)...and that case is being used by the Alberta courts to date to dismiss my clients' argument:
https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/fca/doc...010fca131.html
I have argued the Federal Court of Appeal ruling makes no sense and should be treated as per incuriam (able to be ignored since it was carelessly decided) but that argument is thus far rejected.
It is not exactly riveting for people outside of constitutional law nerds but it is important stuff - particularly in the current environment where the rule of law is being seriously tested on many fronts it seems.