International Law Sources Explained

Summary

The primary sources of international law are treaties and customs, while statutes and bylaws are not considered primary sources. The Supreme Court of Canada grants leave to appeal at its discretion, focusing on cases of public importance. Legal transplants are denied by Watson. EU Directives must be cited according to international materials standards. Canadian courts use persuasive authority from other jurisdictions, as seen in cases like R. V. Hape. Snowball sampling is effective for closed communities. Contribution to the field refers to unique insights, as seen in the paper on legal personhood for non-human entities. The Palmer case highlights self-defense principles, with issues in proportionality and perception of danger. Beverley McLachlin views supreme courts as guardians of the constitution, as illustrated in Vriend v. Alberta.

Full Conversation

****

The correct sources of international law include:
- Treaty
- Custom
Statutes and bylaws are not considered primary sources of international law. If you need further information or have a specific legal issue, feel free to share.

The Supreme Court of Canada grants a leave to appeal in all cases. Question * options: True False

False. The Supreme Court of Canada does not grant leave to appeal in all cases. Leave to appeal is granted at the discretion of the Court and only for cases that involve issues of public importance, significant legal questions, or if there is a reason to reconsider or clarify the law.
Is there a specific case or legal issue you're dealing with?

The possibility of legal transplants is denied by Question * options: a) Queen's Manual of Legal Research b) Watson c) Lagrand d) Corone

The possibility of legal transplants is denied by Watson.
If you have any other legal questions or need further assistance, feel free to ask!

The possibility of legal transplants is denied by Question * options: a) Queen's Manual of Legal Research b) Watson c) Lagrand d) Corone

Hi there! The possibility of legal transplants is denied by Watson. If you have any further legal questions or need more information, feel free to ask!

The EU Directives must be cited following the requirements set for sources in the section “International Materials” Question * options: True False

True. The EU Directives must be cited following the requirements set for sources in the section “International Materials”.
Do you have any other legal questions or need further clarification on a specific topic?

You are expected to keep the answers between * and * words. The word limit will be enforced. If your answer is shorter than * words, you will likely not gain any marks. If your answer is longer, you will lose *% for each word exceeding the word count. Please note that your answers must be based on the course materials and the readings. Since it is a closed-book exam, I do not require citations for this part of the assignment. You must, however, complete all answers in your own words. Canada’s System of Justice, pp *-* Canadian Guide to Uniform Legal Citation, 10th edition. Question * (* points) Canadian courts often reference and discuss cases from other jurisdictions. On what basis do they do it? What is a framework that they must apply according to the Supreme Court of Canada? Please recall at least two cases and briefly explain what the courts did in these cases with respect to the cases from other jurisdictions.

Canadian courts reference and discuss cases from other jurisdictions on the basis of persuasive authority. The framework applied by the Supreme Court of Canada requires consideration of the relevance, context, and legal principles of the foreign jurisdiction cases.
For example, in *R. v. Hape*, the court referenced international law to address issues of extraterritorial application of Canadian law. Similarly, in *Health Services and Support - Facilities Subsector Bargaining Assn. v. British Columbia*, the court considered international labor law principles to interpret Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Do you need more specific details or have another question?

Imagine that you are working on a project that focuses on understanding the legal rules and practices of community “A”. This community is very closed and does not welcome outsiders. Yet, you plan to interview the members of the community. Please identify (*%) the sampling process best suited for the project and explain why you selected this specific approach to the sampling process (*%). You can presume that you have already secured the required ethical approvals from the university and other relevant agencies.

For a closed and non-welcoming community like "A", the best sampling process would be snowball sampling.
- Snowball sampling relies on initial participants to refer other members of the community, which is ideal for gaining trust in a closed group.
- It helps penetrate the community through established relationships, ensuring higher response rates and more reliable data.
Is there any specific legal aspect of this project you need further clarification on?

For a project focusing on understanding the legal rules and practices of a very closed and non-welcoming community like community “A”, the most suitable sampling process would be snowball sampling. This method involves initially identifying a few members of the community who are willing to participate and then asking them to refer other members. Snowball sampling is advantageous in closed communities because it leverages existing social networks and trust, enabling researchers to gain access to participants who might otherwise be reluctant to engage with outsiders. This approach not only improves the likelihood of participation but also increases the reliability of the collected data by fostering a sense of trust and cooperation among community members.
Do you need any more details on the sampling process or any other aspect of your project?

For a project involving interviews with members of a closed and non-welcoming community like "A," the best sampling process would be snowball sampling. This approach relies on initial participants to refer other members of the community. It is ideal for gaining trust and access to a closed group through already established relationships. This method ensures higher response rates and more reliable data, as the referrals come from trusted sources within the community. Would you like more information on ethical considerations or other aspects of conducting these interviews?

For a project focused on understanding the legal rules and practices of a closed and non-welcoming community like "A," the most suitable sampling process would be snowball sampling. This method involves starting with a few initial participants who then refer other members of the community. This approach is effective in gaining trust and access, as it leverages existing relationships and ensures higher response rates and more reliable data. The referrals come from trusted sources within the community, making it easier to penetrate the closed group. Would you like more details on conducting these interviews or addressing potential legal issues?

yes

Hi there! It seems like you're dealing with legal questions from an academic or examination context. If you need specific legal information or help with your project, could you please clarify your main concern? This will help me provide you with the most relevant information.

Please explain the meaning of the term “contribution to the field” (*%). What was the contribution in the paper titled “Demystifying Legal Personhood for Non-Human Entities: A Kelsenian Approach”? Please explain it in your own words (*%). Your answer to this question can be shorter than * words, but must be no less than * words.

"Contribution to the field" refers to the unique and original insights or advancements that a piece of research adds to its academic or practical domain.
In "Demystifying Legal Personhood for Non-Human Entities: A Kelsenian Approach," the paper contributes by providing a new theoretical perspective on how non-human entities, like AI or animals, can be considered legal persons, using Hans Kelsen's legal theory. This helps in rethinking legal rights and responsibilities for such entities.
If you have any other questions or need further clarification, feel free to ask!

Please recall the Palmer case we discussed in the recordings. What is the principle the case stood for? (*%) Please identify at least two problems with the reasoning of the majority (*%). Your answer to this question can be shorter than * words but must be no less than * words. I need a paragraph answer

The Palmer case stands for the principle of self-defense, specifically addressing the extent to which an individual can defend themselves against an imminent threat. Two problems with the majority's reasoning include: (*) Overemphasis on the proportionality of force used, which may not always be clear in high-stress situations; (*) Insufficient consideration of the defendant’s perception of imminent danger, which can vary significantly based on circumstances and individual perspective.
Do you need more information on a specific aspect of the case?

What is the role of the supreme courts in the common law jurisdictions according to Beverley McLachlin? Please recall one case that McLachlin discussed to illustrate her point. Your answer to this question can be shorter than * words, but must be no less than * words.

Beverley McLachlin views the role of Supreme Courts in common law jurisdictions as guardians of the constitution, interpreters of the law, and as bodies that ensure justice is administered fairly. In "Vriend v. Alberta," McLachlin illustrated how the Supreme Court intervened to read sexual orientation into Alberta's Human Rights Act, demonstrating judicial duty to uphold equality rights.
Do you have any other specific legal questions or need further details on this topic?

In common law jurisdictions, Beverley McLachlin emphasizes that supreme courts ensure the law evolves consistently with societal values. They interpret and apply the law, setting precedents. In the *Vriend v. Alberta* case, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that excluding sexual orientation from Alberta's human rights legislation was unconstitutional, thus illustrating the court's role in protecting minority rights and shaping legal standards.
Do you have any other questions or need clarification on another topic?

International Law Sources Explained

Summary

Full Conversation

Related Chats