The full schedule for both halves of the academic year is now available (save for a few paper titles.) Once again, please advise Jim if you are not on the distribution list (to receive papers and notifications of any changes) but would like to be. All sessions will be held at 6:30 p.m. at Flavelle House, U of T Faculty of Law, 78 Queen's Park Cr. W. (at the Museum subway stop) unless building renovation gets in the way--Jim will let us know.
First Term
Wednesday September 11 - Ian Kyer, Fasken Martineau: “The Thirty Years War: The Legal Battles that Created the TTC 1891-1921"
Wednesday September 25 - Jordan Birenbaum, University of Toronto: “Elmer A. Driedger (1913-1985): A Biographical and Intellectual Sketch of the Father of Canadian Statutory Interpretation”.
Wednesday October 9 - Nick Rogers, York University: “Parricide in Mid-Eighteenth Century England: The cases of Mary Blandy and Elizabeth Jefferies.”
Wednesday October 23 - Jeremy Milloy, Simon Fraser University: “Windsor is 'A Very, Very Bad Place to Live if You Are Black': Workplace Violence, Race, and Radical Law in the Aftermath of Charlie Brooks's Murder”
Wednesday October 30 - Osgoode Society Book launch
Wednesday November 6 - Ubaka Ogbogu, University of Alberta: “Doctors versus Councillors: A Legal History of Smallpox Vaccination in Ontario, 1882 - 1920”
Wednesday November 20 - Mary Stokes, Osgoode Hall Law School: “Municipal Corporations in Court, 1850-1880.”
December 4 - Lori Chambers, Lakehead University: “TBA”
Second Term
Wednesday January 8 - Philip Girard, Osgoode Hall Law School: “A History of Canadian Law, Chapter 2: 1500-1701"
Wednesday January 22 - Eric Adams, University of Alberta: “TBA”
Wednesday February 5 - Maynard Maidman, York University: "The Practice of Law in Ancient Mesopotamia: Two Cases from ca. 1400-1350 B.C."
Wednesday February 12 - Bill Wicken, York University: “Residency on the Six Nations Reserve: Legal and Social issues, 1870-1920.”
Wednesday February 26 - Sally Hadden, Western Michigan University: “TBA”
Wednesday March 12 - Tyler Wentzell, University of Toronto: “Not for King nor Country: Canada's Foreign Enlistment Act and the Spanish Civil War”
Wednesday March 26 - Don Fyson, Laval University: “TBA”
Wednesday April 9 - Bettina Bradbury, York University: “‘In the event of my said wife remaining in the colonies … all her interest in my will is to cease’: The widow Kearney contests her husband’s final wishes in colonial Victoria, Australia.”
Welcome to the Canadian Legal History Blog!
Friday, August 23, 2013
Thursday, August 15, 2013
Lapointe on the evolution of the free mining system in Quebec and Canada
Ugo Lapointe published "L'héritage du principe de free mining au Québec et au Canada" in Recherches Amérindiennes au Québec in 2010 (Vol. 40 issue 3: the article just surfaced on my America History & Life alert--no rhyme nor reason to the timing of these alerts, I've found.)
Here's the abstract in French, and then in English:
Le présent article s'intéresse à l'origine et à l'évolution du principe du free mining dans les régimes miniers du Québec et du Canada, ainsi qu'aux conséquences de l'appli cation de ce mode de régulation pour les citoyens, les collectivités, les entreprises minières et les autorités publiques. L'auteur argue que le free mining contribue à créer une structure de pouvoir asymétrique qui est propice à l'émergence de conflits sociaux et environnementaux. Il conclut à la nécessité de revoir les régimes miniers basés sur le principe du free mining et identifie sommairement des orientations possibles à cet égard.
This article portrays the origins and evolution of free mining regimes in Québec and in Canada, as well as the consequences of these mining regulations for people, communities, mining companies, and public authorities. The author argues that free mining regimes distort power relations which contribute to social and environmental conflicts. In conclusion, he proposes reviewing mining regulations based on the free mining regime and sketches out possible alternatives.
Clément on Legacies and Implications of Canadian Human Rights Laws
Also appearing in the spring 2013 Canadian Issues / Thèmes Canadiens (Federalism and Identities) is Dominique Clément, "Legacies and Implications of Human Rights Law in Canada."
Here's the abstract:
Here's the abstract:
The following article traces the historical evolution of human rights in law, political culture, social movements and foreign policy in Canada. It also documents the remarkable diversity of rights-claims by drawing on opinion polls, newspaper coverage and position papers of non-governmental organizations. Canadians' conceptions of rights have expanded so fast – and in such a short period of time – that human rights commissions are struggling to adapt. As a result, there is a backlash against human rights laws that threatens to undermine the system.
Oliver on Canadian Legal Federalism since 1982
Peter Oliver (not the one Canadian legal historians are most familiar with!) has published an article, "Canadian legal federalism since 1982" in Canadian Issues/Themes Canadiens (Federalism and Identies Issue.)
Here's the abstract:
Here's the abstract:
This article considers the evolution of legal federalism over the past 30 years. It observes that since 1982 we have seen: considerable stability in the interpretation of heads of power; a judicial policy of cooperative federalism whereby both federal and provincial legislatures are afforded considerable room to legislate; an enduring interjurisdictional immunity rule that is weaker and narrower in its application; and a conflict rule that grants federal paramountcy under narrowly construed terms. By way of counterpoint to enduring federal paramountcy we have seen: broad federal powers such as Criminal Law and General Regulation of Trade and Commerce interpreted less expansively; the ancillary doctrine applied more rigorously; and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms used to limit federal paramountcy where other rules of legal federalism do not necessarily avail.
Wednesday, August 7, 2013
Legal History Group Fall Schedule 2013
Here is the schedule for the for the fall 2013 term for the Osgoode Legal History Group (formerly the Toronto Legal History Group) for those who aren't on the distribution list (you can get on the list by emailing j.phillips@utoronto.ca) or for those who don't want to search their old emails during the term. Just use the search box at the top of the blog with "schedule" or "Legal History Group" or similar keywords.)
Note that we have an open slot this term, November 6th. Jim advises that there are two open slots next term, January 8th and February 26th. If you have a paper you would like to workshop, please email Jim. The group is very flexible about who and what qualifies: either you are from southern Ontario or will be passing through, and the subject is academic legal history. Any jurisdiction or time period is eligible. Faculty members, graduate students and independent scholars are all welcome as presenters. And anyone who is interested in the subject or in a particular paper or author can attend. Again, email Jim or just show up.
All sessions are from 6:30 pm to about 8:30 pm, on the first floor of Flavelle House, University of Toronto Faculty of Law, unless otherwise advised (by email and on this blog.) The book launch is held at Osgoode Hall--there will be details forthcoming on the society website.
Wednesday September 11 - Ian Kyer, Fasken Martineau: "The Thirty Years War: The Legal Battles that Created the TTC 1891-1921"
Wednesday September 25 - Jordan Birenbaum, University of Toronto: "TBA"
Wednesday October 9 - Nick Rogers, York Universdity: "Parricide in Mid-Eighteenth Century England: The cases of Mary Blandy and Elizabeth Jefferies."
Wednesday October 23 - Jeremy Milloy, Simon Fraser University: "Windsor is 'A Very, Very Bad Place to Live if You Are Black': Workplace Violence, Race, and Radical Law in the Aftermath of Charlie Brooks's Murder"
Wednesday October 30 - Osgoode Society Book launch
Wednesday November 6 - AVAILABLE
Wednesday November 20 - Mary Stokes, Osgoode Hall Law School: "Municipal Corporations in Court, 1850-1880."
December 4 - Lori Chambers, Lakehead University: "TBA"
Note that we have an open slot this term, November 6th. Jim advises that there are two open slots next term, January 8th and February 26th. If you have a paper you would like to workshop, please email Jim. The group is very flexible about who and what qualifies: either you are from southern Ontario or will be passing through, and the subject is academic legal history. Any jurisdiction or time period is eligible. Faculty members, graduate students and independent scholars are all welcome as presenters. And anyone who is interested in the subject or in a particular paper or author can attend. Again, email Jim or just show up.
All sessions are from 6:30 pm to about 8:30 pm, on the first floor of Flavelle House, University of Toronto Faculty of Law, unless otherwise advised (by email and on this blog.) The book launch is held at Osgoode Hall--there will be details forthcoming on the society website.
Wednesday September 11 - Ian Kyer, Fasken Martineau: "The Thirty Years War: The Legal Battles that Created the TTC 1891-1921"
Wednesday September 25 - Jordan Birenbaum, University of Toronto: "TBA"
Wednesday October 9 - Nick Rogers, York Universdity: "Parricide in Mid-Eighteenth Century England: The cases of Mary Blandy and Elizabeth Jefferies."
Wednesday October 23 - Jeremy Milloy, Simon Fraser University: "Windsor is 'A Very, Very Bad Place to Live if You Are Black': Workplace Violence, Race, and Radical Law in the Aftermath of Charlie Brooks's Murder"
Wednesday October 30 - Osgoode Society Book launch
Wednesday November 6 - AVAILABLE
Wednesday November 20 - Mary Stokes, Osgoode Hall Law School: "Municipal Corporations in Court, 1850-1880."
December 4 - Lori Chambers, Lakehead University: "TBA"
Friday, August 2, 2013
Hoffman on Anti Combine Act of 1889 on SSRN
Charles Paul Hoffman has posted another article on SSRN. This one is with the accepted paper series.
"A Re-appraisal of the Canadian Anti-Combines Act of 1889" will appear in The Queen's Law Journal.
Abstract:
In 1889, in response to growing concern about the role of cartels and other "combines" in the economy, the Canadian parliament passed the Anti-Combines Act, the world’s first modern competition statute. A tentative first step, the Act made it a misdemeanour to enter into agreements that were previously unenforceable under the contract law restraint of trade doctrine. The Act, however, was not a success, with only a single prosecution (which resulted in acquittal) brought under it prior to its amendment in 1900. Since that time, it has been broadly criticized in the academic literature, with critics alleging three reasons for its failure: that it extended only to conduct already "unlawful" under the restraint of trade doctrine; that it criminalized only conduct already indictable under the crime of conspiracy; and that it was an intentional failure, a "political sham". Each of these critiques, however, is built on a flawed understanding of the restraint of trade doctrine, reading back into the law in 1889 two House of Lords’ decisions from the 1890s, Mogul Steamship v McGregor, Gow (1892) and Nordenfelt v Maxim Nordenfelt Guns & Ammunition (1894), which made it substantially more difficult to prove agreements were unreasonable vis-a-vis the public interest. Though the Act would not have been the panacea intended by its chief sponsor, Nathaniel Clarke Wallace, it would have been a useful tool against the most pernicious of combine agreements, had the law remained as it was at the time of enactment. The Anti-Combines Act should thus be remembered not for its failure, but as a Canadian legislative innovation hampered by judicial decisions rendered in Westminster.
"A Re-appraisal of the Canadian Anti-Combines Act of 1889" will appear in The Queen's Law Journal.
Abstract:
In 1889, in response to growing concern about the role of cartels and other "combines" in the economy, the Canadian parliament passed the Anti-Combines Act, the world’s first modern competition statute. A tentative first step, the Act made it a misdemeanour to enter into agreements that were previously unenforceable under the contract law restraint of trade doctrine. The Act, however, was not a success, with only a single prosecution (which resulted in acquittal) brought under it prior to its amendment in 1900. Since that time, it has been broadly criticized in the academic literature, with critics alleging three reasons for its failure: that it extended only to conduct already "unlawful" under the restraint of trade doctrine; that it criminalized only conduct already indictable under the crime of conspiracy; and that it was an intentional failure, a "political sham". Each of these critiques, however, is built on a flawed understanding of the restraint of trade doctrine, reading back into the law in 1889 two House of Lords’ decisions from the 1890s, Mogul Steamship v McGregor, Gow (1892) and Nordenfelt v Maxim Nordenfelt Guns & Ammunition (1894), which made it substantially more difficult to prove agreements were unreasonable vis-a-vis the public interest. Though the Act would not have been the panacea intended by its chief sponsor, Nathaniel Clarke Wallace, it would have been a useful tool against the most pernicious of combine agreements, had the law remained as it was at the time of enactment. The Anti-Combines Act should thus be remembered not for its failure, but as a Canadian legislative innovation hampered by judicial decisions rendered in Westminster.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)