Posted in:
Okay Research Wizards – a Challenge
When did a Canadian judge say:
It is every day’s business of the Courts to try questions of foreign law
2007
1997
1987
1977
1967
1957
1947
1937
1927
1917
1907
1897
1887
1877
1867
Bonus prize if you can Name That Judge
Stuart v. Baldwin, (1877) 41 U.C.R. 446 per Wilson JJ. at para. 128. I assume the prize is learning that Quebec is a “foreign” jurisdiction . . . .
Foreign law, not foreign jurisdiction, I’d think; however, in that sense the civil law is a foreign jurisdiction. (Not, ahem, nation).
So, the civil law is by definition foreign to the common law, and equally foreign, in practice, to many common law judges.
Some might suggest that that is also sometimes true, or at least was once sometimes true, about the common law and common law judges – see, for example, Reilly v. Lynn 2003 BCCA 49 at para. 92, Southin J.A. (dissenting – the majority specifically disavowed these comments), but we won’t go there.
Gosh Ted – instantly. It’s in the front of Horace Read’s doctoral dissertation and he remarked on how prominent conflicts of laws were so soon after Confederation. Well spotted.