Grant Huscroft

Last updated

The most important thing I learned as an academic is that disagreement is almost always in good faith. I think we have to approach disputes about rights or the Charter with a great deal of humility and we have to start with the position that however strongly we may feel, we might be wrong.

Huscroft also has participated in Canadian Institute for the Administration of Justice seminars, such as when he presented a paper on "Sufficiency of tribunal reasons: when do a tribunal’s reasons engage issues of procedural fairness" at their May 2016 Advanced Judicial Seminar on Administrative Law reunion. [7]

Notable judgments

In re Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act

In June 2019, Huscroft wrote in his dissenting GHGPPA opinion that the decision of the majority could have repercussions to the existing that division of powers between the provinces and the federal government. [8] He noted: "federalism is no constitutional nicety; it is a defining feature of the Canadian constitutional order that governs the way in which even the most serious problems must be addressed" and "in effect, [the federal government] has asked the court to sanction a change to the constitutional order -- to increase Parliament's lawmaking authority while diminishing that of the provincial legislatures, and to do so on a permanent basis." [9] Huscroft's dissent was described as "traditionalist" in its view of the division of powers and compared to Gérard La Forest, a former puis-ne on the Supreme Court of Canada, by former Attorney-General Peter MacKay. [5]

Published works

Huscroft outlined his criticism of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in a 2012 newspaper article. He argued that the passage of the Charter has provided constitutional status to rights and freedoms while empowering judges to strike down laws passed by democratically elected representatives that are seen to infringe on these rights and freedoms, and that this has resulted in political questions increasingly being brought before the courts and out of the purview of elected representatives. In his view, judges do not have any greater insights into complex social and moral issues than any other person, and therefore the power to find solutions to these issues must be put back in the hands of democratically elected representatives. In support of his position, he pointed out that many judicial decisions interpreting and applying the charter have been controversial, and the opinions of Supreme Court judges have often been divided in these cases. [10]

Articles

  • Huscroft, Grant (2006). "Political Litigation and the Role of the Court". The Supreme Court Law Review: Osgoode's Annual Constitutional Cases Conference. 34.

Learned texts, as editor

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Constitution of Canada</span> Principles, institutions and law of political governance in Canada

The Constitution of Canada is the supreme law in Canada. It outlines Canada's system of government and the civil and human rights of those who are citizens of Canada and non-citizens in Canada. Its contents are an amalgamation of various codified acts, treaties between the Crown and Indigenous Peoples, uncodified traditions and conventions. Canada is one of the oldest constitutional monarchies in the world.

Judicial independence is the concept that the judiciary should be independent from the other branches of government. That is, courts should not be subject to improper influence from the other branches of government or from private or partisan interests. Judicial independence is important to the idea of separation of powers.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Supreme Court of Canada</span> Highest court of Canada

The Supreme Court of Canada is the highest court in the judicial system of Canada. 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. The Supreme Court is bijural, hearing cases from two major legal traditions and bilingual, hearing cases in both official languages of Canada.

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, often simply referred to as the Charter in Canada, is a bill of rights entrenched in the Constitution of Canada, forming the first part of the Constitution Act, 1982. The Charter guarantees certain political rights to Canadian citizens and civil rights of everyone in Canada from the policies and actions of all areas and levels of the government. It is designed to unify Canadians around a set of principles that embody those rights. The Charter was signed into law by Queen Elizabeth II of Canada on April 17, 1982, along with the rest of the Constitution Act, 1982.

Canadian federalism involves the current nature and historical development of the federal system in Canada.

In Canadian and New Zealand law, fundamental justice is the fairness underlying the administration of justice and its operation. The principles of fundamental justice are specific legal principles that command "significant societal consensus" as "fundamental to the way in which the legal system ought fairly to operate", per R v Malmo-Levine. These principles may stipulate basic procedural rights afforded to anyone facing an adjudicative process or procedure that affects fundamental rights and freedoms, and certain substantive standards related to the rule of law that regulate the actions of the state.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Law of Canada</span> Overview of the law of Canada

The legal system of Canada is pluralist: its foundations lie in the English common law system, the French civil law system, and Indigenous law systems developed by the various Indigenous Nations.

<i>Constitution Act, 1867</i> Primary constitutional document of Canada

The Constitution Act, 1867, originally enacted as the British North America Act, 1867, is a major part of the Constitution of Canada. The act created a federal dominion and defines much of the operation of the Government of Canada, including its federal structure, the House of Commons, the Senate, the justice system, and the taxation system. In 1982, with the patriation of the Constitution, the British North America Acts which were originally enacted by the British Parliament, including this Act, were renamed. Although, the acts are still known by their original names in records of the United Kingdom. Amendments were also made at this time: section 92A was added, giving provinces greater control over non-renewable natural resources.

The Court of Appeal for Ontario is the appellate court for the province of Ontario, Canada. The seat of the court is Osgoode Hall in downtown Toronto, also the seat of the Law Society of Ontario and the Divisional Court of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice.

The court system of Canada forms the country's judiciary, formally known as "The King on the Bench", which interprets the law and is made up of many courts differing in levels of legal superiority and separated by jurisdiction. Some of the courts are federal in nature, while others are provincial or territorial.

Section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms ("Charter") is the section of the Constitution of Canada that lists what the Charter calls "fundamental freedoms" theoretically applying to everyone in Canada, regardless of whether they are a Canadian citizen, or an individual or corporation. These freedoms can be held against actions of all levels of government and are enforceable by the courts. The fundamental freedoms are freedom of expression, freedom of religion, freedom of thought, freedom of belief, freedom of peaceful assembly and freedom of association.

Judicial activism is a judicial philosophy holding that the courts can and should go beyond the applicable law to consider broader societal implications of its decisions. It is sometimes used as an antonym of judicial restraint. The term usually implies that judges make rulings based on their own views rather than on precedent. The definition of judicial activism and the specific decisions that are activist are controversial political issues. The question of judicial activism is closely related to judicial interpretation, statutory interpretation, and separation of powers.

Rainer Knopff is a writer, professor of political science at the University of Calgary, Canada, and member of a group known as the Calgary School. He especially well known for his views about the influence of judicial decisions on Canadian public policy. In 2010, Knopff was appointed by the then Prime Minister Stephen Harper to the Governor General Consultation Committee, a special committee to recommend a successor to Governor General of Canada Michaëlle Jean. The panel recommended David Johnston who was installed as viceroy on October 1, 2010.

Section 11 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is the section of the Canadian Constitution that protects a person's legal rights in criminal and penal matters. There are nine enumerated rights protected in section 11.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">History of the Supreme Court of Canada</span>

The Supreme Court of Canada was founded in 1875 and has served as the final court of appeal in Canada since 1949. Its history may be divided into three general eras. From its inception in 1875 until 1949, the Court served as an intermediate appellate court subject to appeal to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in Britain. Following 1949, the Court gained importance and legitimacy as the court of last resort in Canada, establishing a greater role for the Canadian judiciary. In 1982, the introduction of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms significantly changed the role of the Court in Canadian society, by providing the Court with greater powers of oversight over Parliament and through formal recognition of civil rights including aboriginal rights and equality rights.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Supreme court</span> Highest court in a jurisdiction

A supreme court is the highest court within the hierarchy of courts in most legal jurisdictions. Other descriptions for such courts include court of last resort, apex court, and highcourt of appeal. Broadly speaking, the decisions of a supreme court are not subject to further review by any other court. Supreme courts typically function primarily as appellate courts, hearing appeals from decisions of lower trial courts, or from intermediate-level appellate courts.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hate speech laws in Canada</span> Canadian laws relating to hate speech

Hate speech laws in Canada include provisions in the federal Criminal Code, as well as statutory provisions relating to hate publications in three provinces and one territory.

The passage of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in 1982 allowed for the provision of challenging the constitutionality of laws governing prostitution law in Canada in addition to interpretative case law. Other legal proceedings have dealt with ultra vires issues. In 2013, three provisions of the current law were overturned by the Supreme Court of Canada, with a twelve-month stay of effect. In June 2014, the Government introduced amending legislation in response.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms</span> Canadian legal advocacy organization

The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) is a Canadian legal advocacy organization specializing in a social conservative approach to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The libertarian organisation has partnered with several right-wing backers in the United States and pursues legal cases of a social conservative nature.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Russell Brown (judge)</span> Canadian Supreme Court Justice (born 1965)

Russell S. Brown is a puisne justice of the Supreme Court of Canada. He was nominated by Prime Minister Stephen Harper to replace outgoing justice Marshall Rothstein and has been serving in the role since August 31, 2015. Prior to his appointment to the Supreme Court, he was a justice at the Alberta Court of Appeal, and before that a law professor at the University of Alberta.

References

  1. 1 2 "Grant Huscroft appointed to bench in Canada". Auckland Law School. The University of Auckland. 18 December 2014. Retrieved 18 October 2019.
  2. 1 2 3 "Brief Biographical Note of Justice Grant Huscroft". Court of Appeal for Ontario. Retrieved 2019-09-24.
  3. Fine, Sean (17 December 2014). "Tories appoint two conservative law professors as judges". The Globe and Mail. Retrieved 18 October 2019.
  4. "Ontario Judicial Appointments Announced". Department of Justice. Government of Canada. 16 December 2014. Retrieved 18 October 2019.
  5. 1 2 Brean, Joseph (28 June 2019). "In dissent on carbon pricing, a 'traditionalist' judge puts Ottawa in its place". Postmedia Network Inc. National Post.
  6. "Ontario Court of Appeal judge sits down for Q&A with students". Queen's University. Queen's Law. 29 January 2016.
  7. "ADVANCED JUDICIAL SEMINAR ON ADMINISTRATIVE LAW DUNSMUIR ON LIFE SUPPORT: WILL THERE EVER BE LIGHT AT THE END OF THE TUNNEL?" (PDF). CIAJ. 26 May 2016.
  8. McGrath, John Michael (28 June 2019). "What you need to know about the Ontario Court of Appeal's carbon-tax decision". TVO. Ontario Educational Communications Authority.
  9. Strathy C.J.O.; Hoy A.C.J.O.; MacPherson, Sharpe; Huscroft JJ.A. (28 June 2019). "Reference re Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act, 2019 ONCA 544". Court of Appeal for Ontario.
  10. Huscroft, Grant. "Yes. The Charter of Rights has given judges too much power". The Globe and Mail. Retrieved 23 May 2018.
Grant Huscroft
Justice of the Court of Appeal for Ontario
Assumed office
December 16, 2014