Canadian Journal of Law and Society最新文献

{"title":"Virginia Torrie Reinventing Bankruptcy Law: A History of the Companies’ Creditors Arrangements Act. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2020. 300 pp.","authors":"Anna J. Lund","doi":"10.1017/cls.2021.24","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/cls.2021.24","url":null,"abstract":"In Reinventing Bankruptcy Law,Virginia Torrie challenges the orthodox history of The Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (“CCAA”). The CCAA is used in contemporary insolvency practice to liquidate or restructure large businesses. Since the 1980s, courts have adopted a remarkably flexible approach to interpreting the CCAA, justifying their approach on the grounds that the statute’s underlying policy is to facilitate the restructuring of large businesses and thereby prevent the negative repercussions to jobs and local economies that result when businesses are liquidated. Torrie argues that courts have misunderstood the underlying policy of the CCAA, which, she argues, has always been aimed at benefiting secured creditors. Her book is a welcome addition to the small but growing body of historical scholarship on Canadian commercial law. I outline here central points in her analysis. A secured creditor faced with a distressed debtor may more effectively minimize its losses by restructuring the debtor’s obligations (e.g., giving the debtormore time to pay) than by liquidating the debtor (e.g., shutting down the debtor and selling off its assets). Liquidation can be particularly unprofitable during times of generalized economic distress, when there may be little demand for a debtor’s assets. In the early twentieth century in Canada, secured creditors had a contractual right to restructure a debtor’s payment obligations. Secured creditors would purchase bonds issued by a debtor. The bonds were governed by trust deeds, and the trust deed agreements entitled creditors to restructure the underlying debt. In the 1920s and 1930s, in an attempt to attract American investment, some trust deed agreements dropped the restructuring provision.When the Great Depression hit in the 1930s, many businesses were unable to pay their debts and their secured creditors had no effective restructuring tool. The financial fallout threatened the solvency of some of Canada’s big financial institutions because they held bonds issued by the troubled businesses. Failure of these institutions was politically unpalatable, so the federal government passed the CCAA to provide secured creditors with a statutory restructuring remedy. The legal community greeted the CCAAwith scepticism. The statute purported to bind secured creditors, but in the 1930s, most people believed that secured creditors’ remedies were the exclusive purview of provincial governments. To assuage doubters, the federal government referred the legislation to the Supreme Court of Canada. In 1934, the Court upheld the CCAA as a constitutional exercise of the federal government’s bankruptcy and insolvency power. However, the decision did not explicitly address the legislation’s ability to bind secured creditors. Doubts about the CCAA’s constitutionality remained until 1937, when the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council upheld the Farmers’ Creditors Arrangement Act as","PeriodicalId":45293,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Law and Society","volume":"36 1","pages":"533 - 535"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42893120","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"CLS volume 36 issue 3 Cover and Front matter","authors":"Dominique Bernier, Jula Hughes, Thomas McMorrow","doi":"10.1017/cls.2021.38","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/cls.2021.38","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45293,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Law and Society","volume":" ","pages":"f1 - f6"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46111570","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Marginal Citizens: Interracial intimacies and the incarceration of Japanese Canadians, 1942–1949","authors":"M. Vallianatos","doi":"10.1017/cls.2021.18","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/cls.2021.18","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Following Japan’s 1941 attacks on Hawai’i and Hong Kong, Canada relocated, detained, and exiled citizens and residents of Japanese ancestry. Many interracial families, however, were exempted from this racial project called the internment. The form of the exemption was an administrative permit granted to its holder on the basis of their marital or patrilineal proximity to whiteness. This article analyzes these permits relying on archival research and applying a critical race feminist lens to explore how law was constitutive of race at this moment in Canadian history. I argue that the permits recategorized interracial intimacies towards two racial ends: to differentiate the citizen from the “enemy alien”; and to regulate the interracial family according to patriarchal common law principles. This article nuances received narratives of law as an instrument of racial exclusion by documenting the way in which a new inclusive state measure sustained old exclusions.","PeriodicalId":45293,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Law and Society","volume":"37 1","pages":"49 - 67"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-09-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43691215","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Shifting Pendulum: Foreign Investors’ Liability Under Canada’s Common Law for Breaches of Customary International Law","authors":"Jason Haynes","doi":"10.1017/cls.2021.11","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/cls.2021.11","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In February 2020, the Supreme Court of Canada rendered a decision—Nevsun Resources Ltd. v. Araya, 2020 SCC 5—that can properly be described as revolutionary. In Nevsun, the court found that a Canadian corporation operating in a host state, Eretria, could be liable under Canadian domestic law for human rights abuses committed in Eritrea under customary international law, as incorporated into Canadian domestic law. The decision merits special attention because it is likely to fundamentally change the relationship between foreign investors, host states and the residents of host states adversely affected by investors’ unlawful conduct which amount to modern slavery.","PeriodicalId":45293,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Law and Society","volume":"36 1","pages":"447 - 465"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-09-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47203831","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"La Loi sur la laïcité de l’État et les conditions de la fondation juridique d’un modèle interculturel au Québec","authors":"Louis-Philippe Lampron","doi":"10.1017/cls.2021.19","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/cls.2021.19","url":null,"abstract":"Résumé L’interculturalisme québécois est un modèle de gestion de la diversité culturelle et religieuse qui, pour plusieurs, se distinguerait du multiculturalisme à la canadienne et ferait l’objet d’un large consensus au sein de la population québécoise. Résolument pluraliste, ce modèle distinct de gestion de la diversité aurait pu être opérationnalisé juridiquement dans le cadre constitutionnel canadien avant l’adoption de la Loi sur la laïcité de l’État. Or, le processus suivi par le gouvernement québécois pour faire adopter cette dernière, le 16 juin 2019, et tenter d’éviter que sa constitutionnalité puisse être contestée devant les tribunaux canadiens rend très difficile – voire impossible – la fondation juridique de l’interculturalisme québécois dans le contexte actuel.","PeriodicalId":45293,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Law and Society","volume":"36 1","pages":"323 - 337"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45196029","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Formalizing Secularism as a Regime of Restrictions and Protections: The Case of Quebec (Canada) and Geneva (Switzerland)","authors":"Amélie Barras","doi":"10.1017/cls.2021.16","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/cls.2021.16","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In 2019, the province of Quebec and the canton of Geneva passed bills establishing their states as “secular.” While each law is, to a certain extent, context specific, both present noteworthy similarities. First, neutrality (the cornerstone of laïcité) is articulated around two elements: (1) restrictions that affect the religious practices of public servants belonging to minority religions and (2) protections for Christian symbols constructed as “cultural.” The article questions the implications for inclusive citizenship of formalizing regulatory regimes that differentiate between “religion” and “culture.” Second, a comparative lens enables an analysis of how, through whom, and why similar regimes of regulation travel from one area of the world to another. The article argues for the importance of considering transnational influences when analyzing the regulation of religion to better (1) understand why particular models of secularism gain traction and (2) capture power dynamics structuring these processes of traction.","PeriodicalId":45293,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Law and Society","volume":"36 1","pages":"283 - 302"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42252991","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Voting on Belonging","authors":"Diana Dabby","doi":"10.1017/cls.2021.17","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/cls.2021.17","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In 2017, a Muslim cemetery project was proposed in the municipality of St-Apollinaire, just outside Quebec City. This proposal required a change in local zoning, which necessitated approval from citizens living around the targeted plot of land, through the use of diverse deliberative tools. Drawing on a small-scale empirical study conducted in 2017–2018 with key informants in the cemetery project, this article investigates how these actors lived through, engaged with, and operated within the bounds of law. To do this, I suggest employing a legal consciousness framework to examine how local life is also where everyday lived law occurs. The local governance of diversity in death thus requires a re-evaluation of the “local,” identity politics, relationships, and legal consciousness. Ultimately, this article proposes that local decision-making processes play an important yet underexamined role in the broader conversations on belonging.","PeriodicalId":45293,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Law and Society","volume":"36 1","pages":"263 - 282"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44280876","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Our Culture, Our Heritage, Our Values: Whose Culture, Whose Heritage, Whose Values?","authors":"Lori G. Beaman","doi":"10.1017/cls.2021.14","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/cls.2021.14","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article reflects on the question of how culture and religion enter legal cases and public debates about the place of majoritarian religious symbols in diverse societies that have some democratic will to inclusion. In the context of the new diversity, the article considers how the articulation of “our culture and heritage” as a strategy for preserving “formerly” religious symbols and practices in public spaces excludes particular groups from the narrative of who “we” are as a nation. The reader is invited to consider how challenges to such symbols and practices might be articulated as a challenge to privilege and power and that a refusal to acknowledge those power relations puts the reputation of democracy and human rights at risk.","PeriodicalId":45293,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Law and Society","volume":"36 1","pages":"203 - 223"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42266031","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"L’effacement de la laïcité libérale en France. De la séparation du politique et du religieux vers la promotion du « vivre‑ensemble »","authors":"V. Valentin","doi":"10.1017/cls.2021.15","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/cls.2021.15","url":null,"abstract":"Résumé Depuis plusieurs décennies, la laïcité subit en France une transformation profonde qui remet en cause sa dimension libérale. Le principe de séparation du politique et du religieux se dilue au profit de la promotion de la notion récente du « vivre‑ensemble », qui voudrait associer garantie de la liberté religieuse et défense des valeurs républicaines. Ce processus d’érosion s’appuie sur le développement d’une logique concordataire et sur l’émergence d’une conception « communautariste » de la laïcité.","PeriodicalId":45293,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Law and Society","volume":"36 1","pages":"303 - 321"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41525048","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Convergence culturelle et légistique: pour un modèle québécois d’intégration distinct consacré par une loi-cadre","authors":"G. Rousseau","doi":"10.1017/cls.2021.21","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/cls.2021.21","url":null,"abstract":"Résumé Suite à la loi 101, la Politique québécoise du développement culturel a visé à faire en sorte que la culture québécoise soit commune à tous et puisse s’enrichir d’apports en provenance des minorités culturelles. Puis, divers écrits ont contribué à faire évoluer le concept de convergence culturelle, à le critiquer ou à répondre à ceux qui le critiquent. À la lumière de cette politique et de ces écrits, on peut associer ce concept à sept principes : lien consubstantiel entre la langue française et la culture québécoise, impératif de la préservation du statut majoritaire de la culture québécoise et de la langue française, refus de l’assimilation des minorités culturelles, intégration, appropriation identitaire, mixité, et rôle vital des œuvres et productions artistiques. Reprenant ces principes et respectant certains critères de la légistique (clarté, cohérence, concision, véracité), le présent article propose le texte d’une loi-cadre sur la convergence culturelle, et la situe théoriquement.","PeriodicalId":45293,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Law and Society","volume":"36 1","pages":"339 - 357"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44490379","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}