Volume IV, Issue II (April 2006) - Columbus School of Law

More documents

Recommendations

Info

$Connected Minds,Connected Cultures:\ Connected Minds$

upon the spectrum of standards the decision should be reviewed. Although the list is not closed,there are presently three standards recognized on the spectrum:Patently unreasonable: a patently unreasonable decision is one that involves abreach of the rules of natural decision and for which there is no evidence toprovide support. In such situations, the reviewing court will pay the highestlevel of deference and the decision must be found to be patentlyunreasonable for the court to substitute its own decision;Correctness: under the correctness standard of review, the reviewing courtwill pay the lowest level of deference. The decision must be appropriate andproper in the circumstances or the court will substitute its own opinion;Reasonableness simpliciter: falling somewhere in between the two extremes,if the decision is defective, it will survive if it can stand up to a somewhatprobing examination.Applying these standards of review in a case involving a possible Charter violation may result ina diminution of an individual’s rights and freedoms in any given area governed by administrativelaw. Through the application of the stricter constitutional justification analysis, reviewing courtsacross the country now have a mandated method for reviewing administrative decisions dealingwith constitutional issues. Administrative bodies, on the other hand, have a single, commondirection for appropriately and justly dealing with their cases. In the end, individual Canadiansare the winners, as they can ensure that their constitutionally protected rights and freedoms willnot receive a lesser form of protection through administrative tribunals than through the courts.CONCLUSIONDespite the Court’s proclamations concerning the importance our society attaches to protectingfreedom of religion and to showing respect for its minorities, reaction from the general public tothe Multani decision ranged from support to strong opposition. 579 Still, the Multani decision is animportant victory for freedom of religion that can be applied to all rights and freedoms that maybe affected by any one of the thousands of administrative tribunals rendering decisions affectingthe rights and freedoms of Canadians every day. The Court’s conclusion that the administrativelaw standard of review was inappropriate for dealing with the infringement of a constitutionallyprotected right means that the minimum constitutional protection as set out by the Charter mustbe taken into account by the legislature and by every person or body subject to the Charter.Looking at the Multani decision with respect to its impact on the exercise of freedom of religion,it is an important confirmation that in these challenging times for many of the world’s religions,the Courts are still willing to recognize the importance of protecting religious freedom fromunjustifiable interference from state authorities. In the increasingly multicultural society that isCanada, we are bound to continue to run into conflicts between religious freedom and otherimportant social values. As such, it is increasingly important for courts and administrative579 Aside from anti-religious postings on the Globe and Mail website comments section, the decision metwith resistance from parents of school children and educators. As reported in the National Post, a teacher atthe school at the centre of this decision said the court had gone too far and asked if someone could “bring aKalashnikov to school in the name of whatever religion and fire on anyone?” Janice Tibbetts, “Dagger BanStruck Down: Supreme Court says schools must allow kirpans” National Post (3 March 2006) A1.100
tribunals to ensure that an appropriate balance is found between competing rights and obligations.In the Multani decision, the court has firmly established the principles that religious observancesmust be accommodated to the point of undue hardship and that infringement of freedom ofreligion will not be justified unless there is substantial evidence that the infringement is necessaryto protect the safety of the public and that the right is being infringed as minimally as possible.101
Page 1 and 2:
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CIVIL SOCI
Page 3 and 4:
Letter from the EditorDear Readers,
Page 5 and 6:
TABLE OF CONTENTSIJCSL EDITORIAL BO
Page 7 and 8:
ARTICLESTHE ROLE OF THE ISLAMIC WAQ
Page 9 and 10:
‘a bewildering array of the good,
Page 11 and 12:
[a]lthough civil society organizati
Page 13 and 14:
to integrate economic development a
Page 15 and 16:
duty.’ 55 In contrast to zakāt,
Page 17 and 18:
of such venerable educational insti
Page 19 and 20:
avoiding the appearance of impiety,
Page 21 and 22:
…’ 101 Throughout the Islamic w
Page 23 and 24:
partisan judiciary, a vigilant pres
Page 25 and 26:
number of awqaf for myriad public p
Page 27 and 28:
made over to the plundering hands o
Page 29 and 30:
prescribed by law. 159 Like the 192
Page 31 and 32:
property is not a waqf property or
Page 33 and 34:
VIII. REFERENCESA. Articles/BooksAh
Page 35 and 36:
Meidinger, Errol E, ‘Environmenta
Page 37 and 38:
STUDENT ARTICLESINTERNATIONAL INSTR
Page 39 and 40:
interest for the Balkan, minorities
Page 41 and 42:
dimension is emphasized with Articl
Page 43 and 44:
The Copenhagen document deals with
Page 45 and 46:
Historically, the 1946 Constitution
Page 47 and 48:
service, or sometimes 239 special f
Page 49 and 50: This position by the Greek governme
Page 51 and 52: a member of the civil state, entitl
Page 53 and 54: Civilization" with headquarters in
Page 55 and 56: term "vinozhito"(rainbow) could pos
Page 57 and 58: declare the party as unconstitution
Page 59 and 60: The cases analyzed below, exemplify
Page 61 and 62: ECHR, and based upon this analysis,
Page 63 and 64: Jabuka in particular, recognized as
Page 65 and 66: the minority still face problems in
Page 67 and 68: BibliographyBooks:BLACK’S LAW DIC
Page 69 and 70: Vlassis Vlassidis, Veniamin Karakos
Page 71 and 72: THE DIFFERING TAX TREATMENT OF INVE
Page 73 and 74: …any person who, for compensation
Page 75 and 76: the assets under management. 437 Th
Page 77 and 78: As a preliminary matter, a taxpayer
Page 79 and 80: Commissioner further summarized the
Page 81 and 82: number of itemized returns. These t
Page 83 and 84: fiduciary duty implications applica
Page 85 and 86: operate as a fraud or deceit upon t
Page 87 and 88: Policy ConsiderationsIn light of th
Page 89 and 90: more advantageous to address altern
Page 91 and 92: STUDENT NOTESBUILDING CONSUMER CAPA
Page 93 and 94: CASE NOTESC A N A D I A N S U P R E
Page 95 and 96: minimum constitutional protection t
Page 97 and 98: objective of ensuring safety in sch
Page 99: Turning to its impact on courts and
show all

Volume IV, Issue II (April 2006) - Columbus School of Law

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?