Happy Birthday to the Statute of Westminster

by Simon ChesterSimon Chester's involvement with legal information goes back to the Seventies when he taught legal research at Osgoode Hall and served on CLIC's board - that was the Canadian Law Information Council. He has practiced law on Bay Street for almost thirty years and speaks and writes widely on legal and professional issues
[click on the author's name to go to email and web page links] on December 11th, 2006

This morning’s Globe reminds us of a significant anniversary, that of the 75th Anniversary of theStatute of Westminster

By some unseemly joke of constitutional myopia, the Justice Canada website suggests that the Statute has been repealed:

Notice to the reader: This document is no longer in effect. It remains on the site for reference purposesIf one checks the Canada Act, 1982 it states: In so far as they apply to Canada, (a) section 4 is repealed; and (b) subsection 7(1) is repealed. .

Which is hilarious, since it is the third most important statute in terms of defining Canada’s political and constitutional statusAfter the Constitution Act, 1867 and the Canada Act, 1982, which included the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.. In 1931 the Statute of Westminster officially gave the Dominions the full power to rule themselves, although in practice they already did this.

BNA Act, 1867

The power of the Canadian Parliament is expressly sovereign:

SofW, 1931

Churchill’s opposition to the statute was duly noted:

WSC

And for all those Slaw fans of MacKenzie King, a pin-up of him signing the Statute:

MacKenzie King

Respond: Make a comment | Read the 3 comments
Share: Email | Save as PDF | Print | Linkedin, Facebook, Delicious, other
More: on understanding | by Simon Chester

You can use this link to go immediately to leave a comment, ortrackback from your own site.

Currently there are 3 comments on “Happy Birthday to the Statute of Westminster” :

  1. Edward King has this comment:
    December 11th, 2006 at 3:51 pm

    Maybe the UK repealed it, Simon. I think they’re still angry about us selling the Bay to an American.

  2. Simon Fodden has this comment:
    December 11th, 2006 at 6:06 pm

    Nice post, Simon. Love the images of the docs themselves.

  3. Steven Matthews has this comment:
    December 11th, 2006 at 6:25 pm

    :-) I just wrote a comment on how much I liked the paper images and the ‘digital life’ Simon had brought to this post, then nixed it ’cause I thought it sounded sappy…

    Thanks to Simon F., sappy’s ok here at Slaw. :-) count me in too, nice arrangement!

SOME COMMENTS MODERATED

If you have not had an approved comment here before, your comment will be held for approval. We are glad to publish comments that address issues raised in the post or other comments on it and contribute to a fruitful discussion. We do not publish comments that seek to promote commercial products.

Although we do not require it, we ask that in making a comment you use your full name. You must supply a valid email address, which will not appear with your comment.