Abstract
This paper examines the use of comparative law by the Supreme Court of Canada in its 2008 constitutional cases. For all the rhetoric surrounding the Supreme Court as a global constitutional actor, the Supreme Court’s use of comparative law in the 2008 Term was quite modest. of the 12 constitutional cases in 2008, three used comparative law. The Court’s use of comparative constitutional law in 2008 can be described in terms of limited engagement and missed opportunities. In this paper, the author explains why we should be interested in the Supreme Court’s use of comparative law. He the n examines the actual use of comparative law in the companion cases of R. v. Kang-Brown and R. v. M. (A.), as well as the anomalous use of comparative law in Canada (Justice) v. Khadr. The author the n critiques the non-use of comparative law in R. v. Kapp, the Court’s most important equality decision in a decade. The author concludes with words of caution about the future of the Supreme Court of Canada’s international influence and a note of optimism about the possibilities for future comparative engagement.
Citation Information
Dodek, Adam M..
"Comparative Law at the Supreme Court of Canada in 2008: Limited Engagement and Missed Opportunities."
The Supreme Court Law Review: Osgoode’s Annual Constitutional Cases Conference
47.
(2009).
DOI: https://doi.org/10.60082/2563-8505.1184
https://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/sclr/vol47/iss1/16
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License.