Notes

• Author: John Mark Keyes/Wendy Gordon
• Pages: 183-204



Notes

Introduction

  &  Vict, c  (UK), ss –.

 Parliament has exercised its authority under the Constitution Act, , –

Vict, c  (UK) to create the territorial legislatures by Acts of Parliament:

Northwest Territories Act, SC , c , s , Nunavut Act, SC , c , s ,

and Yukon Act, SC , c , s .

 See Commissioner of the Northwest Territories v Canada,  FCA  at paras –.

 A rare example of primary legislation made under the Crown prerogative is

the Canadian Passport Order, SI/-.

 See the Legislative Drafting Conventions of the Uniform Law Conference of

Canada, online: https://ulcc-chlc.ca/Civil-Section/Drafting/Drafting-

Conventions.

 Historically, sections of Acts in England began with the words “provisum est”

(it is provided): see EA Driedger, e Composition of Legislation, d ed (Depart-

ment of Justice: Ottawa, ) at .

 RSC , c C-, Part IX.

  | What Is Drafting?

 See below, Chapter ree: How Is Draft Legislation Turned Into Law?

 See below, in Chapter Two: How Is Legislation Drafted? — Drafters and

Drafting Oces.

DRAFTING, INTERPRETING, AND APPLYING LEGISLATION



 See below, in Chapter Two: How Is Legislation Drafted? — Who Else Is

Involved in Drafting?

 See, for example, Bill C- in the st Session of the nd Parliament, which

led to the introduction and enactment of Bill C- in the nd Session of

the rd Parliament, enacted as SC , c  (United Nations Declaration of

Indigenous Peoples Act).

 See Guide to Making Federal Acts and Regulations, d ed (Privy Council Oce:

Ottawa, ). See online: www.canada.ca/en/privy-council/services/

publications/guide-making-federal-acts-regulations.html.

 See Ministry of Justice, A Guide to Legislation and Legislative Process in British

Columbia, online: www.crownpub.bc.ca/Product/Details/_S

(Victoria: ).

 See online: https://ulcc-chlc.ca/Civil-Section/Drafting/Drafting-Conventions.

 ese requirements are in the Constitution Act, ,  &  Vict, c , s , the

Manitoba Act, , s , the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Part I of the

Constitution Act, , being Schedule B to the Canada Act  (UK), , c ,

ss  & , and the French Language Services Act, RSO , c F., ss –.

 See, for example, the Inuvialuit Regis try of the Inuvialuit Region al Corpora-

tion in Labrador.

 See the Ocial Languages Act, SNu , c , s .

 Reference re Manitoba Language Rights, []  SCR  and Attorney General of

Quebec v Blaikie, []  SCR .

 RSC , c  (th Supp).

 RSNB , c O-.

 See for example, French-language Services Act/Loi sur les services en français, SNS

, c .

 Section  of the North-West Terri tories Act, SC , c , as continued

by s  of the Saskatchewan Act, SC , c , s , required its laws to be

published in both languages, but this requirement was not constitutionally

entrenched: see R v Mercure , []  SCR ; it has since been repe aled.

e Supreme Court has rejected arguments that the laws of Alberta were

required to be published in both English and French: see Caron v Alberta,

 SCC .

 RSO , c F..

 SO , c , Sched , s  (amending s  of the French Language Services Act,

but not yet proclaimed in force).

 Ocial Languages Act, RSNWT , c O-, s ; Ocial Languages Act, SNu

, c , s ; Languages Act, RSY , c , s . ese Acts can be amended

only with the concurrence of Parliament: see Northwest Territori es Act, SC ,

c , s ; Nunavut Act, SC , c , s ; Yukon Act, SC , c , s .