Exam Review – Exam Date: Tuesday June 17th, 2025

• Rule of law  

Rule # 1

• Treat like cases alike and different cases differently 

• Ex. Someone suffering from Tourette's syndrome will be treated differently from a person who does not have TS. If the person was treated like a regular case, it would be an unfair disadvantage to the accused.

Rule # 2

•  Law is unjust if it discriminates based on irrelevant characteristics 

• If you are denied entry to a cinema if you have a specific color of eyes, this would be an  unjust action 

Rule # 3

• Justice should be impartial, law should be implied regardless of a person's position or financial status 

• If a celebrity abuses his/her partner should be charged with assault just as any Canadian would be if they committed the same offence 

• Being a celebrity should not offer any special protection or privileges 

Rule # 4

• The law itself is just in that it conforms to society's values and beliefs 

• If the federal government wanted to strengthen law enforcement by requiring all Canadians to have a sample of their DNA, taken at birth and placed in a national register, people may oppose because it is an unnecessary breach of privacy 

• Judicial independence

• If a country’s people are to respect the law, the judges in that country must be able to function independently of the other branches of government.

• Judges cannot be intimidated by the threat of losing their position, or of being jailed.

• It helps the independence of the judiciary for a country’s court system to be organized in a hierarchical or pyramidal fashion, with many local courts at the bottom and one highest or supreme court at the top.

• This structure allows for a system of appeals.  The appeals process allows for a very thorough review of a case and of the law that applies to it.

• In theory at least, this means that the most appropriate decision will be reached by the of the process.

• Sometimes these decisions can bring about changes to case law (common law) or to the meaning of statute law.

• Legal origins (Greek and Roman)

• The Greeks were the first European people to practice democratic ideals in their political and legal systems.

• They practiced a “limited democracy” - citizenship was limited to native-born men over the age of 18.

• Women, foreigners and slaves were excluded from political life.

• The Athenians expected citizens to take an active role in politics.

• Voting was not just a right, but a serious civic responsibility, as was serving in public office and the military.

• Legal representation in ancient Greece

• People accused of crimes were tried by juries of their fellow citizens.

• No judges or lawyers participated in these trials; the defendant acted as his own lawyer and the jury itself was the judge.

• Equality under the law

• Section 13 of the Charter provides the right to equality, that is , freedom from discrimination.

• It states that everyone has the right to equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination on the basis of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, mental or physical disability, or age.

• Equality rights can be restricted if it is believed that the restrictions are reasonable in a free and democratic society.  For example, you must be a certain age to drive a car, to vote, and to sign a contract.

• Classical legal philosophy

• Belief in natural law: Laws come from nature, reason, or God—not just governments.

• Law is connected to morality—an unjust law is not a true law.

• Emphasizes universal principles like fairness, justice, and human rights.

• Legal rules should reflect rational thought and aim for the common good.

Philosophers : 

• Plato – believed laws should reflect the ideal form of justice and help build a moral society.

• Aristotle – emphasized law as a tool for achieving justice and equality; distinguished between natural justice and legal justice.

• St. Thomas Aquinas – combined Christian theology with Aristotle; said laws that go against moral reason are invalid.
  
  

• Feminist jurisprudence

• Feminist Jurisprudence → The theory that law is an instrument of oppression by men against women

  • Where Marx said that the law oppresses workers on behalf of the capitalist ruling class, feminist theorists argue that it oppresses women on behalf of men.

• Feminist scholars thus directly challenge the idea that the law is objective and neutral in its application and that everyone is treated equally under it.

• This treatment takes at least three forms, according to some feminist legal scholars.  

First Form: 

•  Women were not considered “persons” under the law until 1929 

•  The Women’s Franchise Act, giving women over 21 the right to vote in federal elections, was not passed until 1918

•  Women could not vote in Quebec provincial elections until 1940

• Until 1925, a man could file for divorce on grounds of adultery but a woman could not; she had to be able to prove desertion as well as adultery.

Second Form:

• Unequal representation is the law’s historical failure to respond to women’s needs as distinct from those of men.

  •  For example, only in 1989, in Brooks v. Canada Safeway Ltd., did the Supreme Court of Canada rule that provisions in group insurance plans denying benefits to pregnant women were illegal. 

Third Form:

• Feminist theorists say legal institutions are systematically biased against allowing women to attain positions of power and prestige.

• Division of powers

• Reasonable limits (Charter rights)

Section 1 “guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.”

• Legal precedent

• Past legal decisions that serve as guidelines for similar cases in the future.

• Makes sure that similar cases are treated alike which promotes fairness 

• Collective action

• To move the government to the point at which it is willing to change one of its own laws, it is necessary to develop a widespread consensus, or broad agreement of opinion that the law needs to be changed.

• This is always easier to accomplish when a group of people work together, rather than when one person works alone.

• There are several effective ways for groups of people working together to change the law.  These include lobby groups, Royal Commissions, legal scholarship, and political demonstrations.

• Legal heritage

• Canada’s Laws reflect our Judeo-Christian heritage.

• The primary source for this heritage is the Old Testament of the Christian Bible whose first five books comprise the Jewish Torah.

• When Christian missionaries and colonists came to Canada in the 16th and 17th centuries, they brought their religion with them.

• In addition to its Judeo-Christian heritage, Canada’s laws also reflect the influence of moral philosophy or ethics.

• Canadian laws reflect a strong moral sense that there are certain actions, such as taking another person’s life, that are wrong by their very nature.

• We know murder is wrong not just because religion forbids it, but because human reason tells us so.

• International law

International law is the set of rules and principles that govern relationships between countries (also called "states") and other international actors like the United Nations or multinational corporations.

There are two main types:

1. Public International Law

• Deals with rules between nations.
  
  

• Includes:
  
  

  • Treaties (formal agreements between countries)
    
    

  • Customary international law (long-standing practices)
    
    

  • Human rights law
    
    

  • Laws of war (e.g., Geneva Conventions)
    
    

  • International criminal law (e.g., war crimes, genocide)
    
    

2. Private International Law

• Deals with conflicts between individuals or businesses from different countries.
  
  

• Example: A Canadian company sues a Turkish company—what country’s law applies?
  
  

Example:

When Russia invaded Ukraine, many countries said it violated international law, including the UN Charter, which prohibits aggression against other nations.

• Natural law

• the theory that human laws are derived from eternal and unchangeable principles that regulate the natural world, and that people can become aware of these laws through the use of reason

• Utilitarianism

• the theory that the law should achieve the greatest good for the greatest number of people

• Socrates 

SOCRATES 

Who: 

• A Greek philosopher who lived in Athens during its “golden age,” a time when Greek civilization reached its highest development,

Teachings: 

• His philosophic method was to meet people in the streets and marketplaces of Athens and start a discussion about a particular topic, such as justice, knowledge, love,or virtue. 

  • Dialectic: the process of clarifying an idea through discussion

Trial:

• In 399 BCE, Socrates was tried for "corrupting the youth" and "not believing in the state’s gods." 

  • He argued that his questioning exposed ignorance, not corruption, and that his beliefs were in line with divine will. 

  • However, a jury of 501 citizens found him guilty. After mocking the idea of punishment, he suggested a small fine. 

    • The jury then voted for the death penalty, and he was executed by drinking hemlock.

Natural Law:

• Socrates’ defense in The Apology aligns with natural law, the idea that laws should reflect moral truth. 

  • He believed law should lead people to virtue, not merely enforce obedience. 

• Plato 

PLATO 

Who:

• Plato was a student of Socrates 

  • Socrates never wrote down any of his thoughts, although we know of his teachings from the writings of his pupil, Plato.

Teachings: 

• Plato thought that humans were social by nature and that organized society was a natural institution.

  • Justice: The state or condition that exists when all the powers of an individual or society are working together in harmony for the good of the whole

• Natural law should be evident in two places: in the individual and in the state. 

• An individual is good when their physical, mental, and spiritual aspects work  with reason guiding them. 

• Similarly, a just state functions when each class (rulers and workers) performs its proper role without interfering in others' duties. 

  • Plato saw law as deeply tied to morality, with the fundamental principle being: do good and avoid evil. 

  • Laws must be based on knowledge of the eternal laws that rule the universe

• Charter limits (Section 1)

• Section 1 “guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.”

• This means that any limits imposed on rights and freedoms by s. 1 must meet two basic tests: (1) the limit must be important, and (2) the limit must be reasonable and justified for the benefit of society as a whole.

• Notwithstanding clause: a clause in the Charter that may be invoked by Parliament or provincial legislatures to override basic Charter provisions.

• There are, however, Charter rights (for example, ss. 3 to 6 and ss. 16 - 23) that cannot be avoided through the use of s. 33.

• Victimization

• Fear of being victimized

• Legislative process

The passage of a bill:

To become a law a bill must first be introduced in either the senate or the house of commons. It must then pass through various stages in each house, the first, second, and third reading.

First Reading: 

• The bill is introduced and given first reading

• Minister may discuss the purpose of the bill

• Background information is supplied to opposition parties 

• Bill is printed and distributed

Second Reading:

• Principle of the bill is debated 

• Minister may make a speech to open the debate

• Each member can make only one speech

• Bill may be referred to committee for revision and further examination 

Third Reading:

• Debate is restricted to contents of the bill

• No amendments can be moved

Vote held: Federal: Steps are repeated in the senate. Governor general. Royal assent and proclamation.

Vote held: Provincial: Lieutenant-governor. Royal assent and proclamation.

• Geneva Conventions (know who they are, what they do)

The Geneva Conventions are a series of international treaties that form the core of international humanitarian law, focusing on the humane treatment of individuals during armed conflict. They outline protections for those not participating in hostilities, like civilians, and those no longer participating, such as wounded soldiers and prisoners of war. 

• a body of public international law , also known as the Humanitarian Law of Armed Conflicts

• Litigation

Litigation is the process of taking legal action—resolving disputes through the court system. It usually involves:

• Two or more parties (individuals, companies, or governments)
  
  

• A dispute over legal rights or responsibilities
  
  

• One party (the plaintiff) filing a lawsuit against another (the defendant)
  
  

• A decision made by a judge or jury
  
  

Litigation can include civil cases (e.g., breach of contract, personal injury) or criminal cases (though "litigation" is more often used in civil law).

Example:

A company sues another for copyright infringement. They go to court, present evidence, and wait for a judge to decide the outcome. This whole process is litigation.

• Complaints

In legal terms, a complaint is the formal written document that starts a lawsuit. It’s submitted by the plaintiff (the person suing) to the court and explains:

1. Who is being sued (the defendant)
   
   

2. Why they’re being sued (what they allegedly did wrong)
   
   

3. What the plaintiff wants (money, an action, or a stop to something)
   
   

In Simpler Words:

A complaint is like a letter to the court saying:
"This person/company did something wrong, and I want the court to do something about it."

Example:

If a customer sues a store for selling a broken product that caused injury, the first thing they file in court is a complaint explaining the situation.