Talk:List of Canadian constitutional documents
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
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. |
| List | This article has been rated as List-Class on the quality scale. |
| High | This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. |
 |
[edit] Dividing the list
As I understand it there are a number of the Acts do not fall within the definition of s. 52(2), so aren't part of the constitution today. Perhaps we should divide the list into current constitutional documents and past/defunct constitutional documents. --PullUpYourSocks 13:50, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
- Has List of documents from the constitutional history of Canada completely slipped your mind? CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 19:08, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
- Ah, yes. In fact, it did slip my mind. So then, is this list only documents that fall within the meaning of s.52(2)? I haven't spent any time to figure it out myself so I may be wrong, but I had imagined the list would be smaller than this. -PullUpYourSocks 02:36, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not sure how either list was complied, but section 52 doesn't list anything. It just mentions a schedule that contains the list, but this is not it. I think the official list doesn't include anything before 1867- the Royal Proclamation and Quebec Act aren't on it for example. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 02:41, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- Ah, yes. In fact, it did slip my mind. So then, is this list only documents that fall within the meaning of s.52(2)? I haven't spent any time to figure it out myself so I may be wrong, but I had imagined the list would be smaller than this. -PullUpYourSocks 02:36, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
I think it does include documents that are pre-1867, and much more than the Act of Settlement, as per section 129 of the BNA, 1867. No provincial or Dominion act can repeal or contradict an act of the British parliament. This was true until 1931 when the UK then gave up the right to legislate for Canada with the Statute of Westminster as well as permitting Dominion and provincial laws to contradict British laws.
For instance, the notion that public law is common, not civil, law in Quebec was established in the Quebec Act and has not been mentioned since, yet it is still cited as valid constitutional law (probably per section 129 of the BNA). This is the case because later British acts did not repeal the Quebec Act in full (few laws fully replace previous laws) and certain provisions remain law. The question is whether, because of the above process, is it now just statutory law or has it acquired the aura of constitutional entrenchment (likely through subject matter provisions for amendment in the Canada Act, 1982).
All told this was a very messy way to create a constitution. You really need a constitutional expert to compile a list of extant laws which form part of Canada's constitution. -- G. Csikos, 30 April 2007
