Talk:R. v. Oakes
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. |
| 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. |
 |
Can I suggest this be merged with Oakes test? - Montréalais 05:42, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- I think it could work. I assume you mean redirect Oakes test to R. v. Oakes, right? The case itself is important enough that I'd think it would be worth keeping. My only concern would be that the test as described in the case is not necessarily the exact same test it is today. It's evolved quite a bit since R. v. Oakes. I'd suggest perhaps putting it in section 1. However, none of the articles are very substantial so I don't feel too strongly one way or the other. -- PullUpYourSocks 11:58, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Similar tests
I am interested in whether Oakes test is connected to the proportionality test of German legal theory and ECJ practice? It is very similar to the proportionality test, compare the recent Marks and Spencer decision.
Such a restriction is permissible only if it pursues a legitimate objective compatible with the Treaty and is justified by imperative reasons in the public interest. It is further necessary, in such a case, that its application be appropriate to ensuring the attainment of the objective thus pursued and not go beyond what is necessary to attain it.
I have seen nowhere the two tests linked, but does anyone know of a comparison?
- That's really Interesting. I don't think I've ever heard of any explicit connection, but there could be. Three-part proportionality tests have had a lot of life in the Courts. I can think of several other instances where I've seen tests that look very similar to the Oakes test, so it is difficult to say where they all came from. I'm curious if there is a connection. --PullUpYourSocks 14:09, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
-
- Just read that WTO also uses a similar test. The German version reputedly originates from 19th century Prussian police regulations.
[edit] Dates
Unless they do things differently in Canada, there appears to be a problem with the dates: Argued March 12, 1986, Decided February 28, 1986 BlongerBros 15:57, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Comment
Hi In all the newspapers this case was plublished nobody ever said that I recently had my leg severily crushed at work & smoking hash oil helped with the pain . http://wsib.contact-directconnect.com/images/I_said_my_Leg_was_fucking_sore.jpg
David Edwin Oakes
