tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7665355359899630254.post9157533464069958617..comments2023-12-20T07:29:21.752-05:00Comments on Administrative Law Matters: The Nadon Reference: the 16 (?) Possible OutcomesPaul Dalyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13433629868698007121noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7665355359899630254.post-86377233429717559472014-03-19T21:02:13.578-04:002014-03-19T21:02:13.578-04:00Yes, I didn't really do a good job explaining ...Yes, I didn't really do a good job explaining Option 2. Your formulation is more what I was trying to get at! Though I suppose there may be a slight variation in which they also address the historical materials (perhaps citing yourself and Michael Plaxton!).<br />Paul Dalyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13433629868698007121noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7665355359899630254.post-51767792413943775412014-03-19T17:40:14.718-04:002014-03-19T17:40:14.718-04:00Paul, what about deciding Q2 in the affirmative (...Paul, what about deciding Q2 in the affirmative (within Parl's power and constitutional) and on the basis of the decl provisions' retroactive effect, declining to answer Q1? Carissima Mathenhttp://www.carissimamathen.canoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7665355359899630254.post-62613688547161946792014-03-18T14:50:50.580-04:002014-03-18T14:50:50.580-04:00I'm going with 1, because in my mind, they wou...I'm going with 1, because in my mind, they wouldn't answer the constitutional questions here before doing it in the Senate Reference (many of the questions about the exhaustiveness of ss. 41/42, the meaning of "Constitution of Canada" in the amendment provisions, and the interplay of 41, 42, and 44 being the same in both). <br /><br />Then again, who says that they have to decide the Senate Reference first? Still, if they have already worked through all these questions, why not release the Senate reference?<br /><br />Just guessing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7665355359899630254.post-30488877953617342062014-03-18T00:02:52.140-04:002014-03-18T00:02:52.140-04:00Leaning with 3(a), but will wait to re-watch the f...Leaning with 3(a), but will wait to re-watch the full hearing before giving my final prediction. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7665355359899630254.post-8646638326342009672014-03-17T19:49:31.609-04:002014-03-17T19:49:31.609-04:002(b) contradicts stare decisis and blencoe vs b.c....2(b) contradicts stare decisis and blencoe vs b.c. Human right commission para 35. <br /><br />I like 5.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7665355359899630254.post-15593724289784875502014-03-17T18:25:03.184-04:002014-03-17T18:25:03.184-04:00Paul, I think I developed a brain tumour while rea...Paul, I think I developed a brain tumour while reading this. Let's just wait until Friday... but if I was a betting man, I would go with one of the variants of #2.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15945563791860114875noreply@blogger.com