Suchergebnisse

It is now generally acknowledged that during the course of the last decade the provincial law reform agencies' have emerged as a dominant force in the law reform movement in Canada. The author believes that an analysis of the reports published by these agencies, and the provincial legislation enacted in response to them discloses, however, that to a large extent the imporovements in provincial law that have been gained have come at the expense of uniformity of law among the provinces. This erosion of uniformity under the impact of the benign efforts of the provincial law reform agencies is the subject of this article. Several questions are addressed. Is this trend in the direction of diversity harmful? Why has the work of the agencies generated diversity rather than uniformity? What can be done to reverse the movement?

The term "law reform" has a positive connotation. It indicates that those engaged in the process are at least optimistic to the extent that law can indeed be reformed and not merely changed. A variety of legislative shapes and administrative forms of law reform agencies has been created in this country over the last ten years. The objectives of law reform have been widely discussed in law review articles and in the daily press. There emerges a sense that reforming the law by way of a permanent law reform commission is a viable endeavour. Yet there is some difference of opinion about the approach to be taken and the objectives to be achieved. The words "law reform" have different meanings depending upon one's point of view. An attempt is made here to illustrate three points of view, each having important ramifications in terms of the work undertaken and the goals achieved. Three simplistic hypothetical models are put forward in order to highlight, in a broad way, different meanings attributed to the term "law reform". In addition, the activities of the Law Reform Commission of Saskatchewan will be outlined.

The term "law reform" has a positive connotation. It indicates that those engaged in the process are at least optimistic to the extent that law can indeed be reformed and not merely changed. A variety of legislative shapes and administrative forms of law reform agencies has been created in this country over the last ten years. The objectives of law reform have been widely discussed in law review articles and in the daily press. There emerges a sense that reforming the law by way of a permanent law reform commission is a viable endeavour. Yet there is some difference of opinion about the approach to be taken and the objectives to be achieved. The words "law reform" have different meanings depending upon one's point of view. An attempt is made here to illustrate three points of view, each having important ramifications in terms of the work undertaken and the goals achieved. Three simplistic hypothetical models are put forward in order to highlight, in a broad way, different meanings attributed to the term "law reform". In addition, the activities of the Law Reform Commission of Saskatchewan will be outlined.

Law reform is everywhere in Canada. On all sides substantial changes in diverse areas of the law are constantly being proposed by government organizations whose only purpose is to make such proposals. The reforms mooted by these bodies (these reforms are typically described as "long overdue") are generally welcomed as correcting deficiencies in law and as signalling the legal system's responsiveness to changing social and other standards. Is the law reform pace, if not furious, too fast? What is the most appropriate forum for initiating change in law? Such questions seem reasonable enough, and yet a traditionalist might well argue that irrevocable answers are inherent in any legal system. Both civil and common law systems, so the argument would go, have their chosen instruments of change, and the nature of those instruments substantially determines the rate and extent of progress. If we accept a system, we must accept the way in which, and the extent to which, it responds to alleged needs for reform of its law.

Law reform is everywhere in Canada. On all sides substantial changes in diverse areas of the law are constantly being proposed by government organizations whose only purpose is to make such proposals. The reforms mooted by these bodies (these reforms are typically described as "long overdue") are generally welcomed as correcting deficiencies in law and as signalling the legal system's responsiveness to changing social and other standards. Is the law reform pace, if not furious, too fast? What is the most appropriate forum for initiating change in law? Such questions seem reasonable enough, and yet a traditionalist might well argue that irrevocable answers are inherent in any legal system. Both civil and common law systems, so the argument would go, have their chosen instruments of change, and the nature of those instruments substantially determines the rate and extent of progress. If we accept a system, we must accept the way in which, and the extent to which, it responds to alleged needs for reform of its law.

Until comparatively recent times, continuous, systematic law reform has not been favoured with strong support in those countries nurtured in the common law tradition. In particular, many lawyers in Australia, as elsewhere in the common law world, have tended, for the most part,' to be suspicious and perhaps, subconsciously, more than a little fearful of legal evolution through legislative action rather than judge-made law. This state of mind has belied the realities of the twentieth century life of the law and in many ways as well, the thrust of the law as it evolved in common law countries in the nineteenth century. From the first half of the nineteenth century, through to the present, increasingly law has come to mean statute law and the subordinate legislation which has followed in its wake.2 Concomitant with this, the development of the doctrine of precedent in the past one hundred and fifty years and the frequent acceptance of Benthamite thinking has, on the surface at least, progressively constrained the law creating role of the judiciary. But the influences of older common law traditions have often remained strongly entrenched despite developments like these. While judicial decision-making has loomed much less importantly as an instrument of legal evolution, the common law methodology of moving in a piecemeal, case by case fashion, has often found its expression in a similar style of approach to law reform. For the most part, nineteenth century law reform in England, Australia and elsewhere in the common law world was a paradigm in this regard.

Mr. Sutton discusses the newly formed English Law Commission in an effort to present constructive suggestions for the establishment and maintenance of effective law revision programs for other jurisdictions. He examines the structure of the English commission and points out that the qualities of flexibility, independence, and opportunity for early compromise of its proposals with legislators are essential for a successful law revision commission. The author concludes that the major value to be gained from the English commission is its adoption of a new philosophy of law reform--give the commission sufficient latitude to enable it to stimulate advanced legislation.

The Manitoba Law Reform Commission began work in November, 1970. Its Third Annual Report, signed on April 1st, 1974, indicates that the Commission has submitted fifteen formal reports to the Attorney-General for Manitoba. The recommendations contained in seven of these reports have been implemented by legislation. In the case of two other reports, a change in the law was not recommended and no change was made. The Commission has also made twelve informal reports by way of letter to the Attorney-General. The recommendations contained in four of the informal reports have been implemented by legislation. 5 In the case of another report, no change in the law was recommended. 6 One additional report concerned the question of uniformity between a provincial statute and two related federal statutes. Since the publication of the Third Annual Report, four formal reports and three informal reports have been made. This makes a total of nineteen formal reports and fifteen informal reports. Six recommendations have also been implemented since the last annual report, two in the case of formal reports and four further informal reports." Thus, legislative action has been taken on nine of nineteen formal reports and no legislative action was recommended by the Commission in the case of two other formal reports. Of the fifteen informal reports, eight have been implemented by legislation, in one no change was recommended by the Commission, and in another, federal-provincial negotiations are involved. It is understood that, in the case of two further formal reports, the provincial government is actively considering the Commission's recommendations.

The Manitoba Law Reform Commission began work in November, 1970. Its Third Annual Report, signed on April 1st, 1974, indicates that the Commission has submitted fifteen formal reports to the Attorney-General for Manitoba. The recommendations contained in seven of these reports have been implemented by legislation. In the case of two other reports, a change in the law was not recommended and no change was made. The Commission has also made twelve informal reports by way of letter to the Attorney-General. The recommendations contained in four of the informal reports have been implemented by legislation. 5 In the case of another report, no change in the law was recommended. 6 One additional report concerned the question of uniformity between a provincial statute and two related federal statutes. Since the publication of the Third Annual Report, four formal reports and three informal reports have been made. This makes a total of nineteen formal reports and fifteen informal reports. Six recommendations have also been implemented since the last annual report, two in the case of formal reports and four further informal reports." Thus, legislative action has been taken on nine of nineteen formal reports and no legislative action was recommended by the Commission in the case of two other formal reports. Of the fifteen informal reports, eight have been implemented by legislation, in one no change was recommended by the Commission, and in another, federal-provincial negotiations are involved. It is understood that, in the case of two further formal reports, the provincial government is actively considering the Commission's recommendations.

The Law Reform Commission of British Columbia was constituted by the Law Reform Commission Act' which became law on July 1, 1969. The Commission began functioning in 1970, and is therefore nearing the end of its sixth year of activity. As the original programme of the Commission was designed to be completed in five years, it is appropriate that this opportunity should arise for both retrospective and prospective reflection on its work. The first six years of the Commission's life have been productive and comparatively successful in terms of the subsequent legislative history of its Reports, but for present purposes their most interesting aspect is that they have been years of experiment - in the nature of the projects which have been undertaken, the way in which they have been carried out, the constitution of the Commission itself, its staffing policy and the division of labour between the Commission and its full-time staff on the one hand, and external consultants on the other. The Commission in 1976 is quite different from the Commission of 1970, and the primary purpose of this note is to outline the progress of and changes in the Commission in the intervening years, and to draw certain tentative conclusions therefrom on the appropriate role of a law reform commission in the process of government.

The Law Reform Commission of British Columbia was constituted by the Law Reform Commission Act' which became law on July 1, 1969. The Commission began functioning in 1970, and is therefore nearing the end of its sixth year of activity. As the original programme of the Commission was designed to be completed in five years, it is appropriate that this opportunity should arise for both retrospective and prospective reflection on its work. The first six years of the Commission's life have been productive and comparatively successful in terms of the subsequent legislative history of its Reports, but for present purposes their most interesting aspect is that they have been years of experiment - in the nature of the projects which have been undertaken, the way in which they have been carried out, the constitution of the Commission itself, its staffing policy and the division of labour between the Commission and its full-time staff on the one hand, and external consultants on the other. The Commission in 1976 is quite different from the Commission of 1970, and the primary purpose of this note is to outline the progress of and changes in the Commission in the intervening years, and to draw certain tentative conclusions therefrom on the appropriate role of a law reform commission in the process of government.

The Law Reform Commission of British Columbia was constituted by the Law Reform Commission Act' which became law on July 1, 1969. The Commission began functioning in 1970, and is therefore nearing the end of its sixth year of activity. As the original programme of the Commission was designed to be completed in five years, it is appropriate that this opportunity should arise for both retrospective and prospective reflection on its work. The first six years of the Commission's life have been productive and comparatively successful in terms of the subsequent legislative history of its Reports, but for present purposes their most interesting aspect is that they have been years of experiment - in the nature of the projects which have been undertaken, the way in which they have been carried out, the constitution of the Commission itself, its staffing policy and the division of labour between the Commission and its full-time staff on the one hand, and external consultants on the other. The Commission in 1976 is quite different from the Commission of 1970, and the primary purpose of this note is to outline the progress of and changes in the Commission in the intervening years, and to draw certain tentative conclusions therefrom on the appropriate role of a law reform commission in the process of government.

The Law Reform Commission of British Columbia was constituted by the Law Reform Commission Act' which became law on July 1, 1969. The Commission began functioning in 1970, and is therefore nearing the end of its sixth year of activity. As the original programme of the Commission was designed to be completed in five years, it is appropriate that this opportunity should arise for both retrospective and prospective reflection on its work. The first six years of the Commission's life have been productive and comparatively successful in terms of the subsequent legislative history of its Reports, but for present purposes their most interesting aspect is that they have been years of experiment - in the nature of the projects which have been undertaken, the way in which they have been carried out, the constitution of the Commission itself, its staffing policy and the division of labour between the Commission and its full-time staff on the one hand, and external consultants on the other. The Commission in 1976 is quite different from the Commission of 1970, and the primary purpose of this note is to outline the progress of and changes in the Commission in the intervening years, and to draw certain tentative conclusions therefrom on the appropriate role of a law reform commission in the process of government.

The Law Reform Commission of British Columbia was constituted by the Law Reform Commission Act' which became law on July 1, 1969. The Commission began functioning in 1970, and is therefore nearing the end of its sixth year of activity. As the original programme of the Commission was designed to be completed in five years, it is appropriate that this opportunity should arise for both retrospective and prospective reflection on its work. The first six years of the Commission's life have been productive and comparatively successful in terms of the subsequent legislative history of its Reports, but for present purposes their most interesting aspect is that they have been years of experiment - in the nature of the projects which have been undertaken, the way in which they have been carried out, the constitution of the Commission itself, its staffing policy and the division of labour between the Commission and its full-time staff on the one hand, and external consultants on the other. The Commission in 1976 is quite different from the Commission of 1970, and the primary purpose of this note is to outline the progress of and changes in the Commission in the intervening years, and to draw certain tentative conclusions therefrom on the appropriate role of a law reform commission in the process of government.

Most of the current debate over academic neutrality has centered on whether the university as an institution--the faculty and students as a corporate body--should take formal positions on political issues, such as the war in Vietnam. This article will address the related, but perhaps more mundane, question whether law professors should take a more active role in providing legal services to government and to the public when this activity might provoke attacks on academic freedom. Traditionally, law professors who have sought to serve society in ways other than educating lawyers have engaged in the following five extramural activities:' (1) The production of scholarly writings that are published in the form of horn books and other treatises, monographs on specialized topics, articles in law reviews, and casebooks; (2) Legal aid to the poor; (3) The continuing legal education of the bar; (4) Research and consultation services provided on request to other lawyers and to government agencies on especially difficult legal questions,usually for remuneration. Occasionally, however, law professors have offered their services gratis to organizations or private clients in important test cases, or as amici curiae; and (5) A variety of tasks too multifarious to catalogue associated with the improvement of legal education. This article will examine how this traditional conception of a law school's extramural roles has resulted in two very important needs of American society going virtually unmet, and what can be done to remedy this neglect. The thesis of this article is that law professors, by limiting themselves to these activities, have failed to help government devise rational laws and have neglected to educate the public on the importance of the law in their daily lives. The article examines two ways that law professors could help American society meet these current needs. It concludes with an evaluation of whether these proposed activities would signal a departure from the principle of academic neutrality and therefore ...