This paper addresses the issue of the legitimacy of judicial review from a methodological perspective. It argues that unpredictability of approach is a very serious and dangerous form of judicial activism. It analyses an ambivalent judicial attitude to facts, and the confusion that exists between rules and provisions on the one hand, and interpretation and remedies on the other. It pleads in favour of greater conceptual consistency in the way the Supreme Court of Canada handles methodological issues.
"Institutional Boundaries and Judicial Review: Some Thoughts on How the Court is Going About Its Business: Desperately Seeking Coherence."
The Supreme Court Law Review: Osgoode’s Annual Constitutional Cases Conference
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License.