In Governing from the Bench, Emmett Macfarlane draws on interviews with current and former justices, law clerks, and other staff members of the court to shed light on the institution’s internal environment and decision-making processes. He explores the complex role of the Supreme Court as an institution; exposes the rules, conventions, and norms that shape and constrain its justices’ behavior; and situates the court in its broader governmental and societal context, as it relates to the elected branches of government, the media, and the public.

Introducing the new edition of Canada's leading work on evidence. Stay up-to-date on evidentiary issues with Sopinka, Lederman & Bryant - The Law of Evidence in Canada, 3rd Edition. Cited as authoritative by appellate courts throughout Canada, it is the only major Canadian treatise with in-depth coverage of both civil and criminal evidence. This new edition includes all significant changes to the law of evidence over the past decade.

Canada's Supreme Court decides cases with far-reaching effects on Canadian politics and public policies. When the Supreme Court sets cases on its agenda, it exercises nearly unrestrained discretion and considerable public authority. But how does the Court choose these cases in the first place? From the several hundred requests for judicial review filed every year, how and why do the justices pick some cases but not others for review? Tournament of Appeals investigates the leave to appeal process in Canada and explores how and why certain cases "win" a place on the Court's agenda and others do not. Taking the approach that the process mimics a sports tournament, this study raises several vital questions. For example, is there an elite Supreme Court "bar" that routinely wins the tournament? Do the Court's rules affect the tournament's outcomes? Or does winning and losing reflect the resources of the parties? As players in this tournament, how do the judges play the game and how does it affect their votes to grant or deny judicial review? Drawing from systematically collected information on the process, applications, and lawyers that has never before been used in studies of Canada's Supreme Court, Roy B. Flemming offers both a qualitatively- and quantitatively-based explanation of how Canada's justices grant judicial review. The first of its kind, this innovative study will draw the attention of lawyers, academics, and students in Canada as well as in the Commonwealth, and European countries whose high courts share many features of the appeals process in Canada.

On 3 September 1996, Bill C-41 was proclaimed in force, initiating one significant step in the reform of sentencing and parole in Canada. This is the first book that, in addition to providing an overview of the law, effectively presents a sociological analysis of the legal reforms and their ramifications in this controversial area. The commissioned essays in this collection cover such crucial issues as options and alternatives in sentencing, patterns revealed by recent statistics, sentencing of minority groups, Bill C-41 and its effects, conditional sentencing, and the structure and relationship between parole and sentencing are clearly presented. An introduction, editorial comments beginning each chapter, and a concluding chapter draw the essays together resulting in a timely, comprehensive and extremely readable work on this critical topic. Broad in scope and perspective, this major new socio-legal study of the law of sentencing will be illuminating to students, members of the legal profession, and the general reader.

This collection examines case-based reasoning in constitutional adjudication; that is, how courts decide on constitutional cases by referring to their own prior case law and the case law of other national, foreign, and international courts. Argumentation based on judicial authority is now fundamental to the resolution of constitutional disputes. At the same time, it is the most common form of reasoning used by courts. This volume shows not only the strengths and weaknesses of such argumentation, but also its serious methodological shortcomings. The book is comparative in nature, with individual chapters examining similar problems that different courts have resolved in different ways. The research covers three types of courts; namely the civil law constitutional courts of Germany, Italy, Poland, Lithuania, and Hungary; the common law supreme courts of the United States, Canada, and Australia; and the European international courts represented by the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union. The authors are distinguished scholars from various countries who specialise in constitutional justice issues. This book will be of interest to legal theorists and practitioners, and will be especially insightful for constitutional court judges. The Open Access version of this book, available at www.taylorfrancis.com, has been made available under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives 4.0 license.

The Manitoba Law Journal (MLJ) is a peer-reviewed journal founded in 1961. The MLJ's current mission is to provide lively, independent and high caliber commentary on legal events in Manitoba or events of special interest to our community. The MLJ aims to bring diverse and multidisciplinary perspectives to the issues it studies, drawing on authors from Manitoba, Canada and beyond. Its studies are intended to contribute to understanding and reform not only in our community, but around the world.