Abstract
Over the course of her impressive legal career, Justice Rosalie Abella has been a champion for the administration of justice – a constitutional paradigm in which the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government all share a fundamental duty to ensure that constitutional principles and values are sustained in practice. Thus, she has repeatedly urged judges to exercise restraint when assessing the legality of administrative decisions because administrative officials have valuable experience and expertise regarding the purposive interpretation of legislation. Understanding this constitutional paradigm helps one to identify unifying themes in Abella J’s administrative law jurisprudence and draw important connections between her work and other leading Canadian jurists like Justices Ivan Rand and Bora Laskin. Moreover, it helps one to distinguish this constitutional paradigm from another formalistic constitutional perspective that perceives the judicial role primarily in terms of maintaining an institutional hierarchy in which judges have an interpretive monopoly to determine the content of the law. While the tension between these two constitutional paradigms is apparent in Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v Vavilov, Abella J’s work provides important insights on how to grapple with this tension in a productive and principled manner.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.