Board of Commerce case: Difference between revisions
m →See also: cat |
Kanachandra (talk | contribs) Canada v. Alberta is not the correct name at all. The case deals with Ottawa merchants! |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''' |
''''In re the Board of Commerce Act, 1919, and the Combines and Fair Prices Act, 1919'''' [1922] 1 A.C. 191 - commonly known as the '''Board of Commerce case''' - is a Canadian constitutional decision of the [[Judicial Committee of the Privy Council]] where the "emergency" doctrine under the [[peace, order and good government]] (p.o.g.g.) power was first created. |
||
[[Lord Haldane]], for the Council, found that [[Combines and Fair Prices Act]] enacted by the federal government, which prevented the hoarding of "necessaries of life", was outside their jurisdiction as it could not be justified under any enumerated federal power or the p.o.g.g. power. Haldane rejected p.o.g.g. on the basis that it should only be used in circumstances "such as those of war or famine [where] the peace, order, and good Government of the Dominion might be imperilled under conditions so exceptional that they require legislation of a character in reality beyond anything provided for by the enumerated heads in either section 92 or section 91 itself". |
[[Lord Haldane]], for the Council, found that [[Combines and Fair Prices Act]] enacted by the federal government, which prevented the hoarding of "necessaries of life", was outside their jurisdiction as it could not be justified under any enumerated federal power or the p.o.g.g. power. Haldane rejected p.o.g.g. on the basis that it should only be used in circumstances "such as those of war or famine [where] the peace, order, and good Government of the Dominion might be imperilled under conditions so exceptional that they require legislation of a character in reality beyond anything provided for by the enumerated heads in either section 92 or section 91 itself". |
||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
[[Category:Canadian federalism case law]] |
[[Category:Canadian federalism case law]] |
||
[[Category: Judicial Committee of the Privy Council cases]] |
[[Category: Judicial Committee of the Privy Council cases]] |
||
[[Category:Alberta law]] |
|||
Revision as of 19:22, 11 June 2009
'In re the Board of Commerce Act, 1919, and the Combines and Fair Prices Act, 1919' [1922] 1 A.C. 191 - commonly known as the Board of Commerce case - is a Canadian constitutional decision of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council where the "emergency" doctrine under the peace, order and good government (p.o.g.g.) power was first created.
Lord Haldane, for the Council, found that Combines and Fair Prices Act enacted by the federal government, which prevented the hoarding of "necessaries of life", was outside their jurisdiction as it could not be justified under any enumerated federal power or the p.o.g.g. power. Haldane rejected p.o.g.g. on the basis that it should only be used in circumstances "such as those of war or famine [where] the peace, order, and good Government of the Dominion might be imperilled under conditions so exceptional that they require legislation of a character in reality beyond anything provided for by the enumerated heads in either section 92 or section 91 itself".
Haldane also provided the first definition of the criminal law power under section 91(27) of the Constitution Act, 1867. He stated the power would apply "where the subject matter is one which by its very nature belongs to the domain of criminal jurisprudence." This definition, however, would later be overturned by Lord Atkin in Proprietary Articles Trade Association v. Attorney General of Canada, [1931] A.C. 310 (P.C.).
See also
.svg){kind=small}  | This article about Canadian law is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |