Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- AUTHOR'S NOTE
- PART ONE CONSTITUTIONAL COURTS AS POSITIVE LEGISLATORS IN COMPARATIVE LAW
- CHAPTER 1 JUDICIAL REVIEW OF LEGISLATION AND THE LEGISLATOR
- CHAPTER 2 CONSTITUTIONAL COURTS' INTERFERENCE WITH THE CONSTITUENT POWER
- CHAPTER 3 CONSTITUTIONAL COURTS' INTERFERENCE WITH THE LEGISLATOR ON EXISTING LEGISLATION
- CHAPTER 4 CONSTITUTIONAL COURTS' INTERFERENCE WITH THE LEGISLATOR REGARDING LEGISLATIVE OMISSIONS
- CHAPTER 5 CONSTITUTIONAL COURTS AS LEGISLATORS ON MATTERS OF JUDICIAL REVIEW
- PART TWO NATIONAL REPORTS
- ARGENTINA
- AUSTRALIA
- AUSTRIA
- BELGIUM
- BRAZIL
- CANADA
- COLOMBIA
- COLOMBIA
- COSTA RICA
- CROATIA
- CZECH REPUBLIC
- FRANCE
- GERMANY
- BELGIUM, FRANCE, GERMANY
- GREECE
- HUNGARY
- INDIA
- ITALY
- MEXICO
- NETHERLANDS
- NORWAY
- POLAND
- PORTUGAL
- SERBIA
- SLOVAK REPUBLIC
- SWITZERLAND
- UNITED KINGDOM
- UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
- VENEZUELA
- PART THREE SYNTHESIS REPORT: CONSTITUTIONAL COURTS AS POSITIVE LEGISLATORS IN COMPARATIVE LAW
- APPENDIX
- INDEX
CANADA
The Canadian Constitutional Courts as Positive Legislators
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 04 August 2017
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- AUTHOR'S NOTE
- PART ONE CONSTITUTIONAL COURTS AS POSITIVE LEGISLATORS IN COMPARATIVE LAW
- CHAPTER 1 JUDICIAL REVIEW OF LEGISLATION AND THE LEGISLATOR
- CHAPTER 2 CONSTITUTIONAL COURTS' INTERFERENCE WITH THE CONSTITUENT POWER
- CHAPTER 3 CONSTITUTIONAL COURTS' INTERFERENCE WITH THE LEGISLATOR ON EXISTING LEGISLATION
- CHAPTER 4 CONSTITUTIONAL COURTS' INTERFERENCE WITH THE LEGISLATOR REGARDING LEGISLATIVE OMISSIONS
- CHAPTER 5 CONSTITUTIONAL COURTS AS LEGISLATORS ON MATTERS OF JUDICIAL REVIEW
- PART TWO NATIONAL REPORTS
- ARGENTINA
- AUSTRALIA
- AUSTRIA
- BELGIUM
- BRAZIL
- CANADA
- COLOMBIA
- COLOMBIA
- COSTA RICA
- CROATIA
- CZECH REPUBLIC
- FRANCE
- GERMANY
- BELGIUM, FRANCE, GERMANY
- GREECE
- HUNGARY
- INDIA
- ITALY
- MEXICO
- NETHERLANDS
- NORWAY
- POLAND
- PORTUGAL
- SERBIA
- SLOVAK REPUBLIC
- SWITZERLAND
- UNITED KINGDOM
- UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
- VENEZUELA
- PART THREE SYNTHESIS REPORT: CONSTITUTIONAL COURTS AS POSITIVE LEGISLATORS IN COMPARATIVE LAW
- APPENDIX
- INDEX
Summary
INTRODUCTION
The comparison between the negative and positive roles of constitutional courts provides an interesting perspective on the nature of judicial review and judicial activism in a particular country. Decisions in which courts explicitly require governments to take positive steps either to comply with the Constitution or to provide remedies for constitutional violations are examples of judicial activism in the sense that the unelected judiciary require elected legislatures and governments to act. That said, the more traditional role of judges as negative legislators with powers to invalidate unconstitutional laws and actions may effectively require positive government regulation to be enacted in response. In the modern world, it may not be acceptable for courts acting as a negative legislator to have the final word, and the negative remedies of courts may invoke positive legislative responses from governments. Hence, the distinction between courts acting in a negative or positive fashion may be less clear than when first articulated by Kelsen. This more nuanced understanding of the role of the court as a positive legislator is of particular importance in Canada because of work that has demonstrated frequent legislative replies to Supreme Court of Canada decisions that have simply invalidated legislation as inconsistent with the Canada's constitutional bill of rights, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
This chapter starts with a brief description of the system of judicial review under the Canadian Constitution.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Constitutional Courts as Positive LegislatorsA Comparative Law Study, pp. 315 - 344Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2011
- 3
- Cited by