ALBERTA LAW REVIEW最新文献_第2页

Peeling an Orange and Finding an Apple: Aboriginal Rights Litigation, Joseph Magnet & Dwight Dorey, eds. 《剥橘子和找苹果:原住民权利诉讼》，约瑟夫·马德怀特·多雷编。

IF 0.5

ALBERTA LAW REVIEW Pub Date : 2020-12-07 DOI: 10.29173/ALR1260

Constance Macintosh

引用次数: 0

The Duelling Narratives of Religious Freedom: A Comment on Syndicat Northcrest v. Amselem 宗教自由的决斗叙事——评辛迪加诉阿姆塞勒姆案

IF 0.5

ALBERTA LAW REVIEW Pub Date : 2020-12-07 DOI: 10.29173/ALR1263

K. Chan

引用次数: 0

What Is a Crime? Defining Criminal Conduct in Contemporary Society, Law Commission of Canada, ed. 什么是犯罪？《界定当代社会中的犯罪行为》，加拿大法律委员会，编。

IF 0.5

ALBERTA LAW REVIEW Pub Date : 2020-12-07 DOI: 10.29173/ALR1261

Giles Renaud

引用次数: 0

A Theory of Vicarious Liability 替代责任理论

IF 0.5

ALBERTA LAW REVIEW Pub Date : 2020-12-07 DOI: 10.29173/ALR1254

J. Neyers

{"title":"A Theory of Vicarious Liability","authors":"J. Neyers","doi":"10.29173/ALR1254","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.29173/ALR1254","url":null,"abstract":"This article proposes a theory' of vicarious liability which attempts to explain the central features and limitations of the doctrine. The main premise of the article is that the common law should continue to impose vicarious liability because it can co-exist with the current tort law regime that imposes liability for fault. The author lays out the central features of the doctrine of vicarious liability and examines why the leading rationales (such as control, compensation, deterrence, loss-spreading, enterprise liability and mixed policy) fail to explain or account for its doctrinal rules.\u0000 The author offers an indemnity theory for vicarious liability and examines why the current rules of vicarious liability are limited in application to employer-employee relationships and do not extend further. It is proposed that the solution to the puzzle of vicarious liability rests within the contractual relationship between employer-employee and not the relationship between the employer and the tort victim. The proposed indemnity theory implies a contract term that indemnifies the employee for harms suffered in the course of his or her employment. Vicarious liability then follows from an application of the contractual concepts of subrogation and indemnity to the particular relationship between employee, employer and tort victim. Finally, the article discusses and attempts to resolve the possible criticisms that may follow the indemnity theory, including concerns that it is in conflict with leading decisions, including Lister v. Romford. Bazley v. Curry and Morgans v. Launchbury.","PeriodicalId":54047,"journal":{"name":"ALBERTA LAW REVIEW","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2020-12-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43534192","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}

引用次数: 10

Supreme Court Restates Directors' Fiduciary Duty - A Comment on Peoples Department Stores v. Wise 最高法院重申董事的信义义务——评人民百货公司诉Wise案

IF 0.5

ALBERTA LAW REVIEW Pub Date : 2020-12-07 DOI: 10.29173/ALR1257

D. MacPherson

{"title":"Supreme Court Restates Directors' Fiduciary Duty - A Comment on Peoples Department Stores v. Wise","authors":"D. MacPherson","doi":"10.29173/ALR1257","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.29173/ALR1257","url":null,"abstract":"This article considers the implications of the recent Supreme Court of Canada decision in Peoples Department Stores v. Wise for the law of directors' fiduciary duties. The Court’s decision is attacked on two grounds.\u0000 First, the author criticizes the Court’s interpretation and treatment of the phrase \"the best interests of the corporation\" as found in the Canada Business Corporations Act. It is argued that the decision in Wise rejects the traditional interpretation of this phrase which was previously accepted to mean \"the best interests of the shareholders collectively. \" This rejection raises the spectre of the debate between the \"shareholder primacy \" model of directors' duties and broader \"pluralist\" alternatives. By undercutting the lynchpin of the \"shareholder primacy\" model, the author suggests that the Court has left a vacuum in the law because the Court failed to outline what is to replace this traditional interpretation, or even to acknowledge the substantive change being made. At the level of process, it is equally suggested that the revision of important principles in corporate law exclusively through the judiciary is fundamentally undesirable, where the law of directors' duties has such a large element of public policy attached to it. The author also proposes that the decision in Wise has resulted in an unacceptable level of uncertainty in the law, and that this uncertainty was neither necessary nor advisable to resolve the case before the Court.\u0000 Second, the author criticizes the Court's comments indicating that a breach of fiduciary duty requires mala fides on the part of directors. It is argued that this is inconsistent with pre-existing case law.","PeriodicalId":54047,"journal":{"name":"ALBERTA LAW REVIEW","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2020-12-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47415466","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}

引用次数: 1

The Origins, Early History and Evolution of the English Criminal Trial Jury 英国刑事审判陪审团制度的起源、早期历史与演变

IF 0.5

ALBERTA LAW REVIEW Pub Date : 2020-12-07 DOI: 10.29173/ALR1258

S. Anand

引用次数: 2

On the Legitimacy of Cross-Border Pharmacy 论跨境药房的合法性

IF 0.5

ALBERTA LAW REVIEW Pub Date : 2020-12-07 DOI: 10.29173/ALR1255

S. Rabinovitch

{"title":"On the Legitimacy of Cross-Border Pharmacy","authors":"S. Rabinovitch","doi":"10.29173/ALR1255","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.29173/ALR1255","url":null,"abstract":"Cross-border sales of prescription drugs to U.S. patients by Canadian internet pharmacies have generated significant controversy in the U.S. and Canada. Violative of U.S. drug legislation and of Canadian professional codes of conduct, cross-border pharmacy has nonetheless flourished in response to strong demand and incomplete enforcement. Proponents laud the greater affordability of drugs for U.S. customers; opponents decry the practice as unsafe for U.S. patients, economically ill-advised, and ultimately contrary to Canadian interests. This article evaluates the safety arguments put forward by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and others and concludes that these concerns, though valid, do not justify the current U.S. prohibition on prescription drug imports from Canada. Similarly, professional regulatory bodies' objections to the participation of Canadian doctors and pharmacists in cross-border pharmacy are misplaced. More compelling are the economic arguments against cross-border pharmacy, though even here opponents assume normative positions that should be explicitly defined and socially determined. Finally, however, the article acknowledges that Canada may be compelled by real-world circumstances to curtail cross-border pharmacy in order to safeguard domestic drug supplies.","PeriodicalId":54047,"journal":{"name":"ALBERTA LAW REVIEW","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2020-12-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48487703","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}

引用次数: 2

Alberta's Energy and Utilities Board and the Constitution of Canada 阿尔伯塔省能源和公用事业委员会与加拿大宪法

IF 0.5

ALBERTA LAW REVIEW Pub Date : 2020-12-07 DOI: 10.29173/ALR1256

Nickie Vlavianos

引用次数: 0

Serhan v. Johnson & Johnson: A Case Comment Serhan诉强生案:案例评论

IF 0.5

ALBERTA LAW REVIEW Pub Date : 2020-12-07 DOI: 10.29173/ALR1264

R. Brown, Moin A. Yahya

引用次数: 0

The Jury is Out: The Controversy About Jury Trials Under the Alberta Securities Act 陪审团出局:艾伯塔省证券法下关于陪审团审判的争议

IF 0.5

ALBERTA LAW REVIEW Pub Date : 2020-08-01 DOI: 10.29173/alr2603

R. Stack

引用次数: 0