Talk:Court system of Canada

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Canada Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada and related WikiProjects, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on Canada-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project member page, to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
Canadian law
This article is part of the Canadian law WikiProject (Discuss/Join).

I removed the "Etiquette" section. It seemed ridiculous, a bunch of silly pithy jabs at U.S. culture, starting with the introductory statement

A good Canadian law student or lawyer should be wary of watching American courtroom dramas as he or she may risk embarrassing him or herself when appearing and advocating in a real Canadian court. Canadian courtroom etiquette far more resembles that of England than that of the United States.


Hurr Hurr Hurr, U.S. sux. It's a good idea, just poorly executed. And plus the formatting on that section is god-awful, looks like it was copied and pasted from somewhere. - Kade 20:49, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)


There was an identical article called Canadian court system that I merged with this one, but not much material from the other one survived. Moreover, I renamed this one to the more appropriate title of "Court system of Canada" see Wikipedia:Requested_moves#Courts_of_Canada_.26rarr.3B_Canadian_court_system for comments. I trust no one has any strong feelings against it. - PullUpYourSocks 19:52, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Page move

(from WP:RM)

[edit] Courts of Canada → Canadian court system

I merged the Courts of Canada article with the original Canadian court system as they were pretty much the exact same thing. The better of the two was Courts of Canada so I kept that one, however the Category name is "Canadian court system" so it would be more appropriate to name the article according to that title -- PullUpYourSocks 02:42, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)

  • Support. This seems sensible. Jonathunder 02:47, 2005 Jan 13 (UTC)
  • Oppose - this move disagrees with the general direction given at Wikipedia:WikiProject Countries to use "Entity of Country". -- Netoholic @ 03:01, 2005 Jan 13 (UTC)
  • Oppose: but not because of the guidelines (that say to not enforce them on those actively editting an article) that Netholic posted. Randomly picking an external link (http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/) the title is "Courts of British Columbia". And other random court links I chose. It's clear the sites use "Court of" so I guess the category needs to be changed to match. Cburnett 04:05, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Support. Articles are "X of Y" where it makes sense; such is not the case here. ADH (t&m) 04:36, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Pointless move. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 23:01, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Support either of the two suggested names. -Sean Curtin 05:51, Jan 15, 2005 (UTC)
  • Support the article is about the court system not just the courts. - SimonP 04:12, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Quebec judges

Three judges are required by the Supreme Court Act to come from Quebec. See the text here: [1]

The "v." in the case's title means "and" and not "versus", even though the parties are adversaries. Likewise, the case of R. v. Morgentaler (Canada's criminal law appeal legalizing abortion in 1988) should be cited as "The Queen AND Morgentaler".

The "v." does mean "versus" because when you cite a case in french the "v." becomes a "c.", which stands for "contre". I'm not too sure about oral citations but the "v." definately doesn't stand for "and".--Nickcin2000 14:02, 4 May 2006 (UTC)


The "v." does mean "versus" because when you cite a case in french the "v." becomes a "c.", which stands for "contre". I'm not too sure about oral citations but the "v." definately doesn't stand for "and"

I know that "v.", during oral citation, is pronounced as "AND" and not "VERUS" or "V". When I attend English-language civil court hearings, the judges and lawyers say "AND" when citing a case name containing the "v.".--Alf74 12:42, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Comment

{The jury selection process is a major part of a trial. Up until recently the government prosecution had a huge and unfair advantage in jury selection with 52 to only 12 objections or stand asides to potential jurors. Basically it was possible for the government to handpick the jury. In one case they were able to impose an all female jury on a man accused of physical assault on a woman. The supreme court of canada lacked the probity to rule against this injustice but some years later the federal government decided that the so long accepted jury selection process was unconstitutional. The government prosecutors have many unfair advantages such as being able to impose a jury trial where none is wanted or indeed feared and being able to arbitrarily impose fitness to stand hearings. Most canadians believe they are guilty to proved innocent and point to the fact that canada has one of the highest rates of incarceration in the world. The process of federal government review of possible wrongful convictions is unfair because it denies the wrongly convicted rights if they have any outstanding charge, no matter how minor. How open to abuse the system is when all the police have to do is bring another charge to obstruct the process. Those fighting wrongful convictions are in grave jeopardy because their conviction can be used against them should they exercise their right to testify in their own defense. As support look up the 35 pages of legal sophistry by the supreme court of canada Biddle, Eric R. concerning the all female jury or contact toronto lawyer Leo Adler concerning the review of wrongful conviction ongoing 12 years and necessitating flight from canada in 2000. Eric R. Biddle ericbiddle@hotmail.com