2698:
1291:
105:
Sometimes, with regard to a particular provision of a written constitution, only one court decision has been made. By necessity, until further rulings are made, this ruling is the leading case. For example, in Canada, "he leading case on voting rights and electoral boundary readjustment is
331:
One indication, however, as to whether a case is widely regarded as being "leading" is its inclusion of the ruling in one or more of the series of compilations prepared over the years by various authors. One of the earlier examples is
Augustus Henry Frazer Lefroy's
452:
297:, irrespective of whether they knew about their citizenship status, will be disqualified from sitting in Parliament unless they are irremediably prevented by foreign law from renouncing their foreign citizenship as a result of the operation of
1883:
A. C. 300: establishing a doctrine that ignores "for" tax purposes the purported effect of a pre-ordained series of transactions into which there are inserted steps that have no (commercial purpose) apart from the avoidance of a liability to
116:
is the only case of disputed electoral boundaries to have reached the
Supreme Court." The degree to which this kind of leading case can be said to have "settled" the law is less than in situations where many rulings have reaffirmed the same
1997:: UKSC 5: The Government may not use prerogative powers to undertake action that would remove rights previously granted under primary legislation, and instead must introduce primary legislation to undertake such an action.
157:(Engineers' Case) (1920): Rejected the doctrines of implied intergovernmental immunities and reserved State powers and determined that each head of federal power should be interpreted simply on the words of the grant.
2000:
1428:
1892:
A.C. 474: establishing that tax can be levied on the results of a composite transaction, even if steps that are only there for the purpose of avoiding tax (do not) cancel each other out.
1220:
1213:
813:
to welfare benefits, but that "a positive obligation to sustain life, liberty or security of the person may be made out" under different circumstances than those of the instant case.
1896:
1266:
1993:
1355:
1348:
1309:
1035:
993:
962:
955:
841:
153:
445:
is not concerned with rights in any abstract sense, but rather with the more modest objective of prohibiting restrictions on rights as they existed in Canada at the time the
420:
230:
2683:
921:
879:
803:
768:
752:
717:
706:
1412:(in which the Court established precedent regarding appointment of judges while ensuring absolute independence of the judiciary from the Legislature and the Executive):
2627:
1274:
1255:
1180:
1147:
1114:
1081:
2040:
are significant in developing the law of that state, only a few are so revolutionary that they announce standards that many other state courts then choose to follow.
2013:
is subject to judicial review; prorogation is unlawful if it has the effect of frustrating
Parliament's constitutional obligation without a reasonable justification.
1962:
2036:
may also make such decisions, particularly if the
Supreme Court chooses not to review the case, or adopts the holding of the court below. Although many cases from
1827:
536:
Established that all laws and regulations of the province of Quebec, as well as all courts and tribunals, must treat French and
English with absolute equality.
2023:
1461:
975:
323:
201:
131:
1532:
1330:
209:
107:
302:
1457:
672:
636:
603:
564:
539:
197:
2621:
2049:
253:
the High Court held that only the
Commonwealth had the necessary legislative head of power to reform marriage laws to encompass same-sex marriage.
2240:
1747:
1982:
225:, it was found that Australians accused of serious offences have a limited right to legal representation in order to guarantee a fair trial.
2536:
2059:
1505:
1045:-mandated rights come into existence, for purposes of applicability, only from the moment that their existence is determined by the court.
611:
506:
500:
97:
2483:
1284:
1230:
1155:
1122:
1089:
1010:
968:
854:
298:
2212:
2120:
1572:
1536:
1514:
778:
2054:
1382:
1322:
823:
476:
Established that it is acceptable for
Canadian courts to examine historical material in addition to the text of the relevant statute.
1917:
1859:
1552:
1369:
1056:
816:
654:
512:
200:
to give effect to
Australia's obligations under international law, including to prevent the construction of the Franklin Dam in a
1901:
1764:
1479:
1188:
386:
241:
the High Court held that refugees could not be deported to countries that did not meet certain human rights protection standards.
141:
2647:
1771:
without paying compensation, and that a statute in force may prevail to regulate the exercise of an existing prerogative power.
1399:
1986:
1735:
319:
127:
1391:, which is the highest judicial body in India, has decided many leading cases of Constitutional jurisprudence, establishing
577:
1759:
1568:
272:
271:
the High Court held that the
Commonwealth did not have the necessary constitutional head of legislative power to fund the
1971:
1556:
2233:
2029:
1855:
2 All E.R. 575: establishing liability for pure economic loss, absent any contract, arising from a negligent statement.
1611:
385:. Prior to the abolition of appeals of Supreme Court decisions in the 1940s, most landmark decisions were made by the
90:
Establishing a "test" (that is, a measurable standard that can be applied by courts in future decisions), such as the
2010:
688:
2171:
161:
2403:
1989:
from criminal prosecution, not even if the alleged crime was undertaken in the course their parliamentary duties.
1811:
1632:
1492:
459:
81:
a new principle that refines a prior principle, thus departing from prior practice without violating the rule of
67:
when it has come to be generally regarded as settling the law of the question involved. In 1914, Canadian jurist
30:
2033:
1519:
1471:
642:
Establishes that aboriginal treaty rights are subject to
Canadian law, but not to provincial licensing systems.
264:
2590:
2226:
1768:
585:
17:
930:
646:
2249:
1542:
1475:
1363:
810:
519:
306:
181:
896:
727:
2719:
2600:
1844:
1839:
1096:
479:
2657:
1431:(W.P. (C) 494 of 2012), wherein the Court held that Right to Privacy was a fundamental right under the
1392:
2559:
2410:
2267:
1913:
681:
2703:
2677:
1596:
1564:
1420:
Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association & Anr. v. Union of India (W.P. (C) 1303 of 1987)
1403:
2144:
Michael Pal and Sujit Choudry, "Is Every Ballot Equal? Visible Minority Vote Dilution in Canada",
2099:
1496:
held that Prime Minister Robert Muldoon had purported to suspend laws in a manner contrary to the
2729:
2724:
2672:
2615:
2382:
1336:
1297:
1243:
1201:
1168:
1135:
1102:
1069:
1023:
981:
943:
909:
867:
829:
791:
740:
694:
660:
624:
591:
552:
525:
492:
465:
435:
426:
382:
258:
189:
137:
367:(published in 2008, co-edited by Russell, Morton, Knopff, Thomas Bateman and Janet Hiebert); and
2433:
1947:
1755:: only a party to a contract can be sued on it. (This principle was later reformed by statute.)
1752:
1388:
785:
763:
716:" offences (i.e. offences for which intent or negligence need not be shown) are invalidated by
309:
were either ruled ineligible to serve, or resigned on the basis of holding foreign citizenship.
246:
1518:
that restricting 16 and 17 year olds from voting was unjustified age discrimination under the
2652:
2488:
2473:
1851:
1820:
1432:
1227:
is intended to be remedial, and therefore should be given a large and liberal interpretation.
2542:
1967:
1775:
1676:
1627:
1017:
861:
486:
221:
2191:
2158:
1417:
S.P. Gupta v. Union of India & Anr. (Transfer Case (civil) 19 of 1981; 1982 2 SCR 365)
890:
56:" is commonly used in the United Kingdom and other Commonwealth jurisdictions instead of "
8:
2667:
2493:
2416:
2037:
1832:
1784:
1655:
1497:
2028:
Landmark cases in the United States come most frequently (but not exclusively) from the
1715:
9 A.C. 605: the rule that prevents parties from discharging a contractual obligation by
1316:
2637:
2580:
2523:
2362:
1951:
1816:
1699:
1692:
1687:
1588:
1409:
1063:
1050:
961:
Establishes that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is prohibited under
713:
236:
173:
government's legislation to nationalise Australia's private banks was unconstitutional.
2632:
2585:
2443:
2438:
2372:
2292:
2076:
2287:
2529:
2518:
2508:
2478:
2428:
2422:
2206:
1888:
1716:
1704:
1639:
1580:
1560:
337:
340:
and a changing list of collaborators have published a series of books, including:
2610:
2595:
2463:
2453:
2352:
2277:
2187:
2081:
1908:
1800:
1664:
1660:
734:
68:
45:
1695:): the extent to which a party in breach of contract is liable for the damages.-
1618:): establishing that it was improper for any individual to be allowed to have a
2605:
2570:
2565:
2367:
2357:
2342:
2297:
1955:
1603:
1548:
1195:
373:(published in 2008, co-edited by Russell, Morton, Knopff, Bateman and Hiebert).
289:
177:
78:
74:
A leading decision may settle the law in more than one way. It may do so by:
2713:
2642:
2468:
2377:
2317:
2282:
2071:
1711:
1671:
1607:
1592:
1584:
1402:, (W.P. (C) 135 of 1970), was a case in which the Court formally adopted the
937:
358:
214:
83:
71:
said "a 'leading case' one that settles the law upon some important point".
48:
or concept, or otherwise substantially affect the interpretation of existing
2575:
2498:
2347:
2337:
1934:
1879:
1792:
1788:
1728:
1723:
1680:
1400:
Kesavananda Bharati Sripadagalvaru & Ors. v. State of Kerala & Anr.
618:
294:
2327:
1977:
1864:
1467:
1448:
business PromoSalento in 2018 has been described as a "landmark ruling".
1445:
927:
Establishes that the police cannot enter a home without a search warrant.
546:
354:
328:
There is no universally agreed-to list of "leading decisions" in Canada.
170:
91:
1429:
Justice K. S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.
395:
166:: dealt with what is a matter for the court and what the court can hear.
29:"Landmark case" and "Landmark cases" redirect here. For other uses, see
2448:
2332:
2322:
2272:
2218:
1868:
1796:
1780:
1162:
1129:
903:
280:
37:
136:
Decisions in leading cases in Australia have usually been made by the
2662:
1942:
1237:
41:
2213:
Links to Additional Information on Supreme Court Landmarks Decisions
1395:
for hearing the same. Given below are a list of some leading cases:
1872:
1740:
1619:
756:
196:, the High Court held that the Commonwealth was able to invoke its
1643:(1670) (Court of Common Pleas): establishing the principle that a
1840:
Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corporation
2697:
1897:
Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service
2458:
1921:
1804:
1483:
390:
378:
145:
63:
In Commonwealth countries, a reported decision is said to be a
1994:
R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union
1920:
was required to suspend an "Act" of Parliament that infringed
154:
Amalgamated Society of Engineers v Adelaide Steamship Co. Ltd.
1928:
1767:
to take possession of an owner's land in connection with the
1644:
231:
Plaintiff M70/2011 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship
1763:
A.C 508: establishing that the Crown has no right under the
351:
Federalism and the Charter: Leading Constitutional Decisions
1648:
1526:
2172:
Addressing ‘review fraud’ in the online retail marketplace
2017:
1591:): The first case to use what would come to be called the
2684:
Greenberg v. Miami Children's Hospital Research Institute
1963:
A and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department
712:
Establishes that laws which impose prison sentences for "
49:
2194:, published 11 September 2018, accessed 20 November 2023
1828:
Central London Property Trust Ltd v High Trees House Ltd
1675:(1848) 41 ER 1143: establishing that in certain cases a
678:
Established land title for the Tsilhqot'in First Nation.
2178:, published 14 November 2018, accessed 20 November 2023
1823:
in violation of their "duty of loyalty" to the company.
1679:
can "run with the land" (i.e., bind a future owner) in
847:
Establishes the "Andrews test" for determining whether
1444:
The criminal case against the operator of the Italian
570:
Establishes that aboriginal rights that pre-exist the
411:
Principle or rule established by the court's decision
2024:
List of landmark court decisions in the United States
1462:
List of Judicial Committee of the Privy Council cases
1049:
rights are not "discovered" in the sense proposed by
976:
Law v Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration)
324:
List of Judicial Committee of the Privy Council cases
210:
Eddie Mabo & Ors v The State of Queensland (No.2)
132:
List of Judicial Committee of the Privy Council cases
2192:
Investigations Spotlight: Jail Time for Review Fraud
1533:
List of landmark United Kingdom House of Lords cases
1509:
recognised the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi.
1451:
1331:
Auton (Guardian ad litem of) v British Columbia (AG)
347:(first published 1965, with several later editions);
169:
In 1948, the High Court of Australia found that the
1807:, but established the principle of "duty of care.".
1739:1 QB 256: establishing the test for formation of a
1478:, although historically some have been made by the
533:
Status of English and French in Quebec legislation.
140:, although historically some have been made by the
1319:" to be used in applying human rights legislation.
121:
1458:List of cases of the Supreme Court of New Zealand
2711:
2622:Moore v. Regents of the University of California
2050:List of European Court of Human Rights judgments
1970:without trial was found to be incompatible with
1932:: the House of Lords invalidated the defence of
1659:19 Howell's State Trials 1030: establishing the
176:In 1951, the High Court of Australia found that
313:
1815:"UKHL 1," regarding the rule against company "
1748:Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre v Selfridge and Co. Ltd.
1439:
1376:
851:-protected equality rights have been violated.
473:Use of extraneous material in court decisions.
2234:
2133:Leading Cases in Canadian Constitutional Law.
1269:" determining whether laws placing limits on
1258:(limits on rights protected elsewhere in the
371:The Court and the Constitution: Leading Cases
2537:Schloendorff v. Society of New York Hospital
2060:List of International Court of Justice cases
1506:New Zealand Maori Council v Attorney-General
809:Establishes that section 7 does not mandate
334:Leading Cases in Canadian Constitutional Law
2695:
2633:Medical Experimentation on Black Americans
2241:
2227:
1573:High Court of Justice of England and Wales
1537:List of United Kingdom Supreme Court cases
1515:Make It 16 Incorporated v Attorney-General
574:cannot be infringed without justification.
353:(published in 1989, co-edited by Russell,
2055:List of European Court of Justice rulings
1707:for some inherently dangerous activities.
1663:of individuals and limiting the scope of
1490:In 1976, the Wellington Supreme Court in
1383:List of landmark court decisions in India
824:Andrews v Law Society of British Columbia
36:Landmark court decisions, in present-day
2571:Albert Kligman's dermatology experiments
2248:
1860:Fagan v Metropolitan Police Commissioner
1527:Landmark decisions in the United Kingdom
365:The Court and the Charter: Leading Cases
2628:Surgery to try to improve mental health
2043:
2018:Landmark decisions in the United States
1480:Judicial Committee of the Privy Council
387:Judicial Committee of the Privy Council
142:Judicial Committee of the Privy Council
14:
2712:
2006:Cherry v Advocate General for Scotland
1950:is not a valid defence to a charge of
1938:to reflect a changing view in society.
1843:1 KB 223: establishing the concept of
1273:-protected rights are permitted under
299:s 44(i) of the Australian Constitution
293:was clarified and it was found that a
2222:
2157:Mabo v Queensland (1989) 166 CLR 186
2148:vol. 13, no. 1 (January 2007), p. 14.
1736:Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company
1216:(Minority-language education rights)
655:Tsilhqot'in Nation v British Columbia
320:List of Supreme Court of Canada cases
287:, the High Court's earlier ruling in
128:List of High Court of Australia cases
2702:This article includes a law-related
1512:In 2022, the Supreme Court ruled in
1053:, and therefore are not retroactive.
336:, published in 1914. More recently,
273:National School Chaplaincy Programme
1972:European Convention on Human Rights
1557:Supreme Court of the United Kingdom
767:violated the right of women, under
24:
2215:– Constitutional Rights Foundation
2030:Supreme Court of the United States
2009:UKSC 41: The prerogative power of
1727:14 P.D. 64 (1889): the concept of
1547:Decisions in leading cases in the
25:
2741:
2200:
1760:A-G v De Keyser's Royal Hotel Ltd
1452:Landmark decisions in New Zealand
1423:In re Special reference 1 of 1998
689:Reference Re BC Motor Vehicle Act
60:", as used in the United States.
44:that determine a significant new
2696:
2207:Supreme Court Landmark Decisions
1875:to establish a criminal offence.
1787:as the foundation of the modern
1703:(1868) LR 3 HL 330: doctrine of
1503:In 1987, the Court of Appeal in
1474:before the establishment of the
345:Leading Constitutional Decisions
162:Re Judiciary and Navigation Acts
2404:Betancourt v. Trinitas Hospital
2117:Leading Cases in the Common Law
2034:United States Courts of Appeals
2002:R (Miller) v The Prime Minister
1812:Regal (Hastings) Ltd v Gulliver
1493:Fitzgerald v Muldoon and Others
1366:to receive government services.
460:Reference Re Anti-Inflation Act
213:invalidated the declaration of
122:Landmark decisions in Australia
31:Landmark cases (disambiguation)
2648:Radioactive iodine experiments
2181:
2164:
2151:
2138:
2135:Toronto: Carswell, 1914, p. v.
2131:Augustus Henry Frazer Lefroy,
2125:
2109:
2093:
1904:is subject to judicial review.
1567:; in England and Wales by the
1551:have usually been made by the
1520:New Zealand Bill of Rights Act
1472:Court of Appeal of New Zealand
1466:Decisions in leading cases in
761:The abortion provision in the
381:have usually been made by the
377:Decisions in leading cases in
265:Williams v Commonwealth (No 2)
13:
1:
2591:Guatemala syphilis experiment
2087:
1863:1 QB 43: the requirement for
586:Delgamuukw v British Columbia
1543:List of House of Lords cases
1476:Supreme Court of New Zealand
775:to "security of the person".
520:Quebec (AG) v Blaikie (No 1)
413:
410:
407:
404:
401:
398:
314:Landmark decisions in Canada
285:(The Citizenship Seven Case)
182:Communist Party of Australia
69:Augustus Henry Frazer Lefroy
7:
2601:Human radiation experiments
2065:
1845:Wednesbury unreasonableness
1819:" and officers from taking
1440:Landmark decisions in Italy
1377:Landmark decisions in India
1097:Irwin Toy Ltd v Quebec (AG)
1007:-prohibited discrimination.
421:Robertson and Rosetanni v R
10:
2746:
2658:Stanford prison experiment
2021:
1803:, which was held later as
1540:
1530:
1455:
1380:
507:constitutional conventions
501:Constitutional conventions
317:
125:
28:
2560:Abdullahi v. Pfizer, Inc.
2551:
2507:
2411:Commonwealth v. Twitchell
2391:
2306:
2268:Betty and George Coumbias
2256:
2104:in the English Dictionary
1914:European Court of Justice
1614:): (most widely known as
96:(in Canadian law) or the
40:legal systems, establish
2678:Willowbrook State School
2119:, Clarendon Press, 1996
1799:. This case used a wide
1597:statutory interpretation
1565:High Court of Justiciary
1404:Basic structure doctrine
1183:(Freedom of expression)
1150:(Freedom of expression)
1117:(Freedom of expression)
1084:(Freedom of expression)
889:ought to be interpreted
509:are not legally binding.
251:(Same-Sex Marriage Case)
2673:Tuskegee Syphilis Study
2616:Joseph Gilbert Hamilton
2395:parent/patient/guardian
2393:Medical opinion against
1983:Parliamentary privilege
1900:UKHL 9: the use of the
1821:corporate opportunities
1555:, or more recently the
436:Canadian Bill of Rights
383:Supreme Court of Canada
269:(School Chaplains Case)
259:Williams v Commonwealth
190:Commonwealth v Tasmania
138:High Court of Australia
2434:Archie Battersbee case
1831:K.B. 130: doctrine of
1616:The Case of Monopolies
1389:Supreme Court of India
1003:test" for identifying
918:Constitution Act, 1982
786:Gosselin v Quebec (AG)
669:Constitution Act, 1982
633:Constitution Act, 1982
600:Constitution Act, 1982
572:Constitution Act, 1982
561:Constitution Act, 1982
247:Commonwealth v the ACT
198:external affairs power
184:were unconstitutional.
180:' attempts to ban the
2653:Skid Row Cancer Study
2489:Spiro Nikolouzos case
2474:Joseph Maraachli case
2022:Further information:
1987:Members of Parliament
1852:Hedley Byrne v Heller
1751:A.C. 847: confirming
1633:Court of Common Pleas
1559:; in Scotland by the
1541:Further information:
1433:Constitution of India
885:Establishes that the
441:Establishes that the
194:(Tasmanian Dams Case)
2668:Plutonium injections
2250:Medical ethics cases
2209:– Cornell Law School
2044:International courts
2038:state supreme courts
1968:Indefinite detention
1776:Donoghue v Stevenson
1769:defence of the realm
1691:(1854) 9 Exch. 341 (
1677:restrictive covenant
1628:Case of Prohibitions
1393:Constitution Benches
1018:Canada (AG) v Hislop
862:Hunter v Southam Inc
487:Patriation Reference
405:Date & citation
222:Dietrich v The Queen
2494:Aruna Shanbaug case
2417:Mordechai Dov Brody
1833:promissory estoppel
1785:neighbour principle
1753:privity of contract
1656:Entick v Carrington
1498:Bill of Rights 1689
924:(Procedural rights)
675:(Aboriginal rights)
647:R v Marshall (No 2)
645:R v Marshall (No 1)
639:(Aboriginal rights)
606:(Aboriginal rights)
567:(Aboriginal rights)
202:World Heritage Zone
2720:Lists of law lists
2638:Milgram experiment
2581:Deep sleep therapy
2543:Christiane Völling
2524:Gillick competence
2115:A. W. B. Simpson,
1952:actual bodily harm
1700:Rylands v Fletcher
1693:Court of Exchequer
1688:Hadley v Baxendale
1589:Exchequer of Pleas
1410:Three Judges Cases
1362:does not create a
1351:(Equality rights)
1312:(Equality rights)
1064:Ford v Quebec (AG)
996:(Equality rights)
714:absolute liability
237:Malaysian Solution
2693:
2692:
2444:Tirhas Habtegiris
2439:Charlie Gard case
2373:Karen Ann Quinlan
2293:Piergiorgio Welby
2077:Lists of case law
1985:does not protect
1902:royal prerogative
1765:royal prerogative
1608:77 Eng. Rep. 1260
1470:were made by the
1374:
1373:
1354:Establishes that
1345:Charter of Rights
1315:Establishes the "
1306:Charter of Rights
1265:Establishes the "
1252:Charter of Rights
1219:Establishes that
1210:Charter of Rights
1177:Charter of Rights
1144:Charter of Rights
1111:Charter of Rights
1078:Charter of Rights
1041:Establishes that
1038:(Equality rights)
1032:Charter of Rights
999:Establishes the "
990:Charter of Rights
958:(Equality rights)
952:Charter of Rights
876:Charter of Rights
844:(Equality rights)
838:Charter of Rights
800:Charter of Rights
749:Charter of Rights
703:Charter of Rights
505:Establishes that
102:(in English law).
16:(Redirected from
2737:
2700:
2519:Ashley Treatment
2509:Informed consent
2479:Jahi McMath case
2429:Alfie Evans case
2423:Lantz v. Coleman
2243:
2236:
2229:
2220:
2219:
2195:
2185:
2179:
2168:
2162:
2155:
2149:
2142:
2136:
2129:
2123:
2113:
2107:
2097:
1889:Furniss v Dawson
1783:established the
1731:in contract law.
1717:part performance
1705:strict liability
1647:cannot coerce a
1561:Court of Session
755:(Legal rights),
396:
338:Peter H. Russell
65:leading decision
21:
2745:
2744:
2740:
2739:
2738:
2736:
2735:
2734:
2710:
2709:
2708:
2707:
2694:
2689:
2611:Jesse Gelsinger
2596:Henrietta Lacks
2547:
2511:
2503:
2484:Sarah Murnaghan
2464:Ashya King case
2454:Sun Hudson case
2396:
2394:
2387:
2353:Vincent Lambert
2310:
2308:
2302:
2278:Giovanni Nuvoli
2261:
2259:
2252:
2247:
2203:
2198:
2188:TripAdvisor LLC
2186:
2182:
2169:
2165:
2156:
2152:
2143:
2139:
2130:
2126:
2114:
2110:
2098:
2094:
2090:
2082:Test case (law)
2068:
2046:
2026:
2020:
1916:ruled that the
1909:Factortame case
1801:ratio decidendi
1779:S.C.(H.L.) 31:
1665:executive power
1661:civil liberties
1569:Court of Appeal
1545:
1539:
1531:Main articles:
1529:
1464:
1456:Main articles:
1454:
1442:
1385:
1379:
811:positive rights
735:R v Morgentaler
408:Subject matter
326:
318:Main articles:
316:
307:45th Parliament
134:
126:Main articles:
124:
46:legal principle
34:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
2743:
2733:
2732:
2730:Judgment (law)
2727:
2725:Case law lists
2722:
2701:
2691:
2690:
2688:
2687:
2680:
2675:
2670:
2665:
2660:
2655:
2650:
2645:
2640:
2635:
2630:
2625:
2618:
2613:
2608:
2606:J. Marion Sims
2603:
2598:
2593:
2588:
2586:Doctors' Trial
2583:
2578:
2573:
2568:
2566:Albert Stevens
2563:
2555:
2553:
2549:
2548:
2546:
2545:
2540:
2533:
2526:
2521:
2515:
2513:
2505:
2504:
2502:
2501:
2496:
2491:
2486:
2481:
2476:
2471:
2466:
2461:
2456:
2451:
2446:
2441:
2436:
2431:
2426:
2419:
2414:
2407:
2399:
2397:
2392:
2389:
2388:
2386:
2385:
2380:
2375:
2370:
2368:Haleigh Poutre
2365:
2360:
2358:Robert Latimer
2355:
2350:
2345:
2343:Eluana Englaro
2340:
2335:
2330:
2325:
2320:
2314:
2312:
2304:
2303:
2301:
2300:
2298:Jack Kevorkian
2295:
2290:
2288:Ramón Sampedro
2285:
2280:
2275:
2270:
2264:
2262:
2257:
2254:
2253:
2246:
2245:
2238:
2231:
2223:
2217:
2216:
2210:
2202:
2201:External links
2199:
2197:
2196:
2180:
2163:
2150:
2137:
2124:
2108:
2091:
2089:
2086:
2085:
2084:
2079:
2074:
2067:
2064:
2063:
2062:
2057:
2052:
2045:
2042:
2019:
2016:
2015:
2014:
1998:
1990:
1974:
1959:
1956:common assault
1939:
1925:
1918:House of Lords
1905:
1893:
1885:
1876:
1856:
1848:
1836:
1824:
1808:
1772:
1756:
1744:
1732:
1720:
1708:
1696:
1684:
1668:
1652:
1636:
1623:
1604:Darcy v Allein
1600:
1553:House of Lords
1549:United Kingdom
1528:
1525:
1524:
1523:
1510:
1501:
1453:
1450:
1441:
1438:
1437:
1436:
1425:
1424:
1421:
1418:
1414:
1413:
1407:
1381:Main article:
1378:
1375:
1372:
1371:
1367:
1364:positive right
1352:
1342:
1339:
1334:
1326:
1325:
1320:
1313:
1303:
1300:
1295:
1287:
1286:
1282:
1263:
1249:
1246:
1241:
1233:
1232:
1228:
1217:
1207:
1204:
1199:
1196:Mahe v Alberta
1191:
1190:
1186:
1184:
1174:
1171:
1166:
1158:
1157:
1153:
1151:
1141:
1138:
1133:
1125:
1124:
1120:
1118:
1108:
1105:
1100:
1092:
1091:
1087:
1085:
1075:
1072:
1067:
1059:
1058:
1054:
1039:
1029:
1026:
1021:
1013:
1012:
1008:
997:
987:
984:
979:
971:
970:
966:
959:
949:
946:
941:
933:
932:
928:
925:
915:
912:
907:
899:
898:
894:
883:
882:(Legal rights)
873:
870:
865:
857:
856:
852:
845:
835:
832:
827:
819:
818:
814:
807:
806:(Legal rights)
797:
794:
789:
781:
780:
776:
759:
746:
743:
738:
730:
729:
725:
710:
709:(Legal rights)
700:
697:
692:
684:
683:
679:
676:
666:
663:
658:
650:
649:
643:
640:
630:
627:
622:
614:
613:
609:
607:
597:
594:
589:
581:
580:
575:
568:
558:
555:
550:
542:
541:
537:
534:
531:
528:
523:
515:
514:
510:
503:
498:
495:
490:
482:
481:
477:
474:
471:
468:
463:
455:
454:
450:
447:Bill of Rights
443:Bill of Rights
439:
432:
429:
424:
416:
415:
412:
409:
406:
403:
400:
375:
374:
368:
362:
348:
315:
312:
311:
310:
290:Sykes v Cleary
276:
254:
242:
226:
218:
205:
185:
178:Robert Menzies
174:
167:
158:
123:
120:
119:
118:
103:
88:
79:Distinguishing
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2742:
2731:
2728:
2726:
2723:
2721:
2718:
2717:
2715:
2705:
2704:list of lists
2699:
2686:
2685:
2681:
2679:
2676:
2674:
2671:
2669:
2666:
2664:
2661:
2659:
2656:
2654:
2651:
2649:
2646:
2644:
2643:Monster Study
2641:
2639:
2636:
2634:
2631:
2629:
2626:
2624:
2623:
2619:
2617:
2614:
2612:
2609:
2607:
2604:
2602:
2599:
2597:
2594:
2592:
2589:
2587:
2584:
2582:
2579:
2577:
2574:
2572:
2569:
2567:
2564:
2562:
2561:
2557:
2556:
2554:
2550:
2544:
2541:
2539:
2538:
2534:
2532:
2531:
2530:Marion's Case
2527:
2525:
2522:
2520:
2517:
2516:
2514:
2510:
2506:
2500:
2497:
2495:
2492:
2490:
2487:
2485:
2482:
2480:
2477:
2475:
2472:
2470:
2469:Jesse Koochin
2467:
2465:
2462:
2460:
2457:
2455:
2452:
2450:
2447:
2445:
2442:
2440:
2437:
2435:
2432:
2430:
2427:
2425:
2424:
2420:
2418:
2415:
2413:
2412:
2408:
2406:
2405:
2401:
2400:
2398:
2390:
2384:
2383:Gloria Taylor
2381:
2379:
2378:Terri Schiavo
2376:
2374:
2371:
2369:
2366:
2364:
2361:
2359:
2356:
2354:
2351:
2349:
2346:
2344:
2341:
2339:
2336:
2334:
2331:
2329:
2326:
2324:
2321:
2319:
2318:Andrew Bedner
2316:
2315:
2313:
2305:
2299:
2296:
2294:
2291:
2289:
2286:
2284:
2283:Sue Rodriguez
2281:
2279:
2276:
2274:
2271:
2269:
2266:
2265:
2263:
2255:
2251:
2244:
2239:
2237:
2232:
2230:
2225:
2224:
2221:
2214:
2211:
2208:
2205:
2204:
2193:
2189:
2184:
2177:
2173:
2167:
2160:
2154:
2147:
2141:
2134:
2128:
2121:
2118:
2112:
2105:
2103:
2096:
2092:
2083:
2080:
2078:
2075:
2073:
2072:Case citation
2070:
2069:
2061:
2058:
2056:
2053:
2051:
2048:
2047:
2041:
2039:
2035:
2031:
2025:
2012:
2008:
2007:
2003:
1999:
1996:
1995:
1991:
1988:
1984:
1980:
1979:
1975:
1973:
1969:
1965:
1964:
1960:
1957:
1953:
1949:
1945:
1944:
1940:
1937:
1936:
1931:
1930:
1926:
1923:
1919:
1915:
1911:
1910:
1906:
1903:
1899:
1898:
1894:
1891:
1890:
1886:
1882:
1881:
1877:
1874:
1870:
1866:
1862:
1861:
1857:
1854:
1853:
1849:
1846:
1842:
1841:
1837:
1834:
1830:
1829:
1825:
1822:
1818:
1814:
1813:
1809:
1806:
1802:
1798:
1794:
1790:
1786:
1782:
1778:
1777:
1773:
1770:
1766:
1762:
1761:
1757:
1754:
1750:
1749:
1745:
1742:
1738:
1737:
1733:
1730:
1729:implied terms
1726:
1725:
1721:
1718:
1714:
1713:
1712:Foakes v Beer
1709:
1706:
1702:
1701:
1697:
1694:
1690:
1689:
1685:
1682:
1678:
1674:
1673:
1672:Tulk v Moxhay
1669:
1666:
1662:
1658:
1657:
1653:
1650:
1646:
1642:
1641:
1640:Bushel's Case
1637:
1634:
1630:
1629:
1624:
1622:over a trade.
1621:
1617:
1613:
1609:
1606:
1605:
1601:
1598:
1594:
1593:mischief rule
1590:
1586:
1583:
1582:
1581:Heydon's Case
1578:
1577:
1576:
1574:
1570:
1566:
1562:
1558:
1554:
1550:
1544:
1538:
1534:
1521:
1517:
1516:
1511:
1508:
1507:
1502:
1499:
1495:
1494:
1489:
1488:
1487:
1485:
1481:
1477:
1473:
1469:
1463:
1459:
1449:
1447:
1434:
1430:
1427:
1426:
1422:
1419:
1416:
1415:
1411:
1408:
1405:
1401:
1398:
1397:
1396:
1394:
1390:
1384:
1370:
1368:
1365:
1361:
1357:
1353:
1350:
1346:
1343:
1340:
1338:
1337:Supreme Court
1335:
1333:
1332:
1328:
1327:
1323:
1321:
1318:
1314:
1311:
1310:section 15(1)
1307:
1304:
1301:
1299:
1298:Supreme Court
1296:
1294:
1293:
1289:
1288:
1285:
1283:
1280:
1276:
1272:
1268:
1264:
1261:
1257:
1253:
1250:
1247:
1245:
1244:Supreme Court
1242:
1240:
1239:
1235:
1234:
1231:
1229:
1226:
1222:
1218:
1215:
1211:
1208:
1205:
1203:
1202:Supreme Court
1200:
1198:
1197:
1193:
1192:
1189:
1187:
1185:
1182:
1178:
1175:
1172:
1170:
1169:Supreme Court
1167:
1165:
1164:
1160:
1159:
1156:
1154:
1152:
1149:
1145:
1142:
1139:
1137:
1136:Supreme Court
1134:
1132:
1131:
1127:
1126:
1123:
1121:
1119:
1116:
1112:
1109:
1106:
1104:
1103:Supreme Court
1101:
1099:
1098:
1094:
1093:
1090:
1088:
1086:
1083:
1079:
1076:
1073:
1071:
1070:Supreme Court
1068:
1066:
1065:
1061:
1060:
1057:
1055:
1052:
1048:
1044:
1040:
1037:
1033:
1030:
1027:
1025:
1024:Supreme Court
1022:
1020:
1019:
1015:
1014:
1011:
1009:
1006:
1002:
998:
995:
994:section 15(1)
991:
988:
985:
983:
982:Supreme Court
980:
978:
977:
973:
972:
969:
967:
964:
963:section 15(1)
960:
957:
956:section 15(1)
953:
950:
947:
945:
944:Supreme Court
942:
940:
939:
938:Egan v Canada
935:
934:
931:
929:
926:
923:
919:
916:
913:
911:
910:Supreme Court
908:
906:
905:
901:
900:
897:
895:
892:
888:
884:
881:
877:
874:
871:
869:
868:Supreme Court
866:
864:
863:
859:
858:
855:
853:
850:
846:
843:
839:
836:
833:
831:
830:Supreme Court
828:
826:
825:
821:
820:
817:
815:
812:
808:
805:
801:
798:
795:
793:
792:Supreme Court
790:
788:
787:
783:
782:
779:
777:
774:
770:
766:
765:
764:Criminal Code
760:
758:
754:
750:
747:
744:
742:
741:Supreme Court
739:
737:
736:
732:
731:
728:
726:
723:
719:
715:
711:
708:
704:
701:
698:
696:
695:Supreme Court
693:
691:
690:
686:
685:
682:
680:
677:
674:
673:section 35(1)
670:
667:
664:
662:
661:Supreme Court
659:
657:
656:
652:
651:
648:
644:
641:
638:
637:section 35(1)
634:
631:
628:
626:
625:Supreme Court
623:
621:
620:
616:
615:
612:
610:
608:
605:
604:section 35(1)
601:
598:
595:
593:
592:Supreme Court
590:
588:
587:
583:
582:
578:
576:
573:
569:
566:
565:section 35(1)
562:
559:
556:
554:
553:Supreme Court
551:
549:
548:
544:
543:
540:
538:
535:
532:
529:
527:
526:Supreme Court
524:
522:
521:
517:
516:
513:
511:
508:
504:
502:
499:
496:
494:
493:Supreme Court
491:
489:
488:
484:
483:
480:
478:
475:
472:
469:
467:
466:Supreme Court
464:
462:
461:
457:
456:
453:
451:
448:
444:
440:
438:
437:
433:
430:
428:
427:Supreme Court
425:
423:
422:
418:
417:
397:
394:
392:
388:
384:
380:
372:
369:
366:
363:
360:
359:Rainer Knopff
356:
352:
349:
346:
343:
342:
341:
339:
335:
329:
325:
321:
308:
304:
300:
296:
292:
291:
286:
283:
282:
277:
274:
270:
267:
266:
261:
260:
255:
252:
249:
248:
243:
240:
238:
233:
232:
227:
224:
223:
219:
216:
215:terra nullius
212:
211:
206:
203:
199:
195:
192:
191:
186:
183:
179:
175:
172:
168:
165:
163:
159:
156:
155:
151:
150:
149:
147:
143:
139:
133:
129:
115:
111:
110:
104:
101:
100:
95:
94:
89:
86:
85:
84:stare decisis
80:
77:
76:
75:
72:
70:
66:
61:
59:
58:landmark case
55:
51:
47:
43:
39:
32:
27:
19:
18:Landmark case
2682:
2620:
2576:David Reimer
2558:
2535:
2528:
2512:to treatment
2499:David Vetter
2421:
2409:
2402:
2348:June Hartley
2338:Baby Doe Law
2183:
2175:
2170:Davies, G.,
2166:
2153:
2146:IRPP Choices
2145:
2140:
2132:
2127:
2116:
2111:
2102:leading case
2101:
2095:
2027:
2005:
2001:
1992:
1976:
1961:
1941:
1935:marital rape
1933:
1927:
1907:
1895:
1887:
1880:Ramsay v IRC
1878:
1858:
1850:
1838:
1826:
1810:
1793:English tort
1789:Scots delict
1774:
1758:
1746:
1734:
1724:The Moorcock
1722:
1710:
1698:
1686:
1670:
1654:
1638:
1625:
1615:
1612:King's Bench
1602:
1579:
1546:
1513:
1504:
1491:
1465:
1443:
1386:
1359:
1344:
1329:
1317:Meiorin test
1305:
1290:
1278:
1270:
1259:
1251:
1236:
1224:
1209:
1194:
1181:section 2(b)
1176:
1161:
1148:section 2(b)
1143:
1128:
1115:section 2(b)
1110:
1095:
1082:section 2(b)
1077:
1062:
1046:
1042:
1031:
1016:
1004:
1000:
989:
974:
951:
936:
917:
902:
886:
875:
860:
848:
837:
822:
799:
784:
772:
762:
748:
733:
721:
702:
687:
668:
653:
632:
619:R v Marshall
617:
599:
584:
571:
560:
545:
518:
485:
458:
449:was enacted.
446:
442:
434:
419:
376:
370:
364:
350:
344:
333:
330:
327:
295:dual citizen
288:
284:
279:
268:
263:
257:
250:
245:
234:
229:
220:
208:
193:
188:
160:
152:
135:
113:
108:
98:
92:
82:
73:
64:
62:
57:
54:Leading case
53:
35:
26:
2328:Paul Brophy
2309:Withholding
2307:Euthanasia/
2100:Meaning of
2011:prorogation
1978:R v Chaytor
1865:concurrence
1651:to convict.
1468:New Zealand
1446:fake review
1341:2004 SCC 78
1028:2007 SCC 10
891:purposively
796:2002 SCC 84
665:2014 SCC 44
547:R v Sparrow
355:F.L. Morton
112:. In fact,
2714:Categories
2449:Rom Houben
2333:Carol Carr
2323:Tony Bland
2273:Dax Cowart
2088:References
1869:actus reus
1797:negligence
1781:Lord Atkin
1356:section 15
1349:section 15
1267:Oakes test
1221:section 23
1214:section 23
1173:2001 SCC 2
1163:R v Sharpe
1130:R v Zundel
1051:Blackstone
1036:section 15
904:R v Feeney
842:section 15
596:3 SCR 1010
557:1 SCR 1075
530:2 SCR 1016
414:Full text
303:15 members
281:Re Canavan
117:principle.
99:Bolam test
93:Oakes test
42:precedents
38:common law
2663:Study 329
2311:treatment
2258:Assisted
2176:Juriosity
1981:UKSC 52:
1966:UKHL 56:
1946:UKHL 19:
1943:R v Brown
1817:directors
1585:76 ER 637
1275:section 1
1256:section 1
1248:1 SCR 103
1238:R v Oakes
1206:1 SCR 342
1140:2 SCR 731
1107:1 SCR 927
1074:2 SCR 712
986:1 SCR 497
948:2 SCR 513
922:section 8
880:section 8
872:2 SCR 145
834:1 SCR 143
804:section 7
769:section 7
753:section 7
718:section 7
707:section 7
699:2 SCR 486
629:3 SCR 456
497:1 SCR 753
470:2 SCR 373
399:Decision
2552:Research
2159:AustLill
2066:See also
1873:mens rea
1741:contract
1631:(1607) (
1620:monopoly
1587:(1584) (
914:2 SCR 13
757:abortion
745:1 SCR 30
2260:suicide
1948:Consent
1571:or the
1360:Charter
1358:of the
1302:3 SCR 3
1292:Meiorin
1279:Charter
1277:of the
1271:Charter
1260:Charter
1225:Charter
1223:of the
1047:Charter
1043:Charter
1005:Charter
887:Charter
849:Charter
773:Charter
771:of the
722:Charter
720:of the
431:SCR 651
305:of the
171:Chifley
2459:Baby K
2363:Baby M
1922:EC law
1912:: the
1805:obiter
1681:equity
1484:London
402:Court
391:London
379:Canada
164:(1921)
146:London
114:Carter
109:Carter
1929:R v R
1795:) of
1645:judge
239:Case)
235:(The
2004:and
1884:tax.
1871:and
1649:jury
1626:The
1595:for
1535:and
1460:and
1387:The
357:and
322:and
262:and
207:In
130:and
1954:or
1867:of
1563:or
1482:in
1001:Law
389:in
278:In
256:In
244:In
228:In
187:In
144:in
52:. "
50:law
2716::
2190:,
2174:,
2032:.
1575:.
1486:.
1347:,
1324:.
1308:,
1254:,
1212:,
1179:,
1146:,
1113:,
1080:,
1034:,
992:,
954:,
920:,
878:,
840:,
802:,
751:,
705:,
671:,
635:,
602:,
579:.
563:,
393:.
361:);
301:.
148:.
2706:.
2242:e
2235:t
2228:v
2161:.
2122:.
2106:.
1958:.
1924:.
1847:.
1835:.
1791:(
1743:.
1719:.
1683:.
1667:.
1635:)
1610:(
1599:.
1522:.
1500:.
1435:.
1406:.
1281:.
1262:)
965:.
893:.
724:.
275:.
217:.
204:.
87:;
33:.
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.