Extractions: December 10, 2004 In a landmark opinion, Canada's Supreme Court said Thursday that proposed legislation allowing gay marriage is constitutional, but the government cannot force religious officials to perform unions against their beliefs. This decision puts Canada as a leader of progressive thinking in North America, Gay marriage issue was the main reason for John Kerrys defeat in US election. In eleven states, a referendum on banning Gay marriage was put on the same ballot as the presidential election. In Central and Southern United States, the evangelical Christians came out in large number and voted for George Bush and ban Gay marriages in all eleven states. Canadian Supreme Courts decision manifests the sharp ideological differences between Canada, the blue states in USA and red states of America.
Extractions: On Dec. 9, the Supreme Court of Canada will release its decision on whether the bill is within federal jurisdiction, whether same-sex marriage is consistent with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, whether the charter protects the clergy from having to perform marriages against their religious beliefs, and whether the common law definition of marriage between one man and one woman violates the Charter.
Slashdot | No Levy On IPods In Canada Good work canadian supreme court. Reply to This . for those groklaw fans outthere (Score1) by 5plicer (886415) on Friday July 29, http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/07/28/2227251&from=rss
[IP] Canadian Supreme Court Issues ISP & Net Music Decision Subject IP canadian supreme court Issues ISP Net Music Decision When combined with another Supreme Court decision from earlier this year (CCH), http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/200406/msg00217.ht
Extractions: Date Prev Thread Prev Date Index Thread Index ... Elist Home Subject http://www.lexum.umontreal.ca/csc-scc/en/rec/html/2004scc045.wpd.html http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/printarticle/gam/ http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/printarticle/gam/ http://www.michaelgeist.ca - You are subscribed as interesting-people@lists.elistx.com To manage your subscription, go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/ Date Prev Thread Prev Date Index ... Elist Home Search: this month this year this elist Match: all any boolean Sort by: score date reverse score reverse date
Extractions: hostName = '.basalquestions.org'; Main Canadian Supreme Court Strikes Down Quebec Ban on Private Health Insurance: Chaoulli v. Quebec (Attorney General) In short, snipping from the syllabus: The evidence shows that, in the case of certain surgical procedures, the delays that are the necessary result of waiting lists increase the patientâs risk of mortality or the risk that his or her injuries will become irreparable. The evidence also shows that many patients on nonâurgent waiting lists are in pain and cannot fully enjoy any real quality of life. The right to life and to personal inviolability is therefore affected by the waiting times. The infringement of the rights protected by s. 1 [ Every human being has a right to life, and to personal security, inviolability and freedom. ] is not justified under s. 9.1 of the Quebec Charter . The general objective of the HOIA and the HEIA is to promote health care of the highest possible quality for all Quebeckers regardless of their ability to pay. The purpose of the prohibition on private insurance in s. 11
Extractions: The Canadian patent infringement action began in 1997, when Monsanto discovered genetically engineered canola plants growing on Percy Schmeiser's farm. Mr. Schmeiser contended that since a plant is a higher life form and cannot be patented, he had done nothing wrong. Monsanto did not patent the genetically modified plant itself, but rather the genes and the modified cells it contained. "The appellants actively cultivated Roundup Ready Canola as part of their business operations," a majority led by Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin and Mr. Justice Morris Fish concluded. "In light of all of the relevant considerations, the appellants used the patented genes and cells, and infringement is established.
Canadian Supreme Court Permits Infra-red Home Searches In Rv Tessling, the canadian supreme court rules that the use of a thermal imagingdevice to scan an individual s home did not violate the accused http://www.privacyinternational.org/article.shtml?cmd[347]=x-347-95729
Wfn.org | UCC Welcomes Canadian Supreme Court Same-sex Ruling Canadas largest Protestant denomination, The United Church of Canada, said todaythat it welcomes the Supreme Court ruling on the governments proposed http://www.wfn.org/2004/12/msg00076.html
Associated Baptist Press - News canadian supreme court OKs gaymarriage legislation. Date, 12/10/2004 WASHINGTON (ABP) The Supreme Court of Canada has given legislators the green http://www.abpnews.com/news/news_detail.cfm?NEWS_ID=403
Extractions: Atom Seven Canadian judges A long list of interveners represented all sides of the health care spectrum. In the middle were the CMA/Canadian Orthopaedic Association (COA) and a group of 10 senators led by Michael Kirby, which maintained that the status quo is unacceptable but that the system can still be fixed within its existing publicly funded structure. Also facing off were the Charter Committee on Poverty Issues and Canadian Health Coalition, which consider privatization anathema, and 14 private British Columbia clinics that maintain the introduction of a parallel private system in Canada would improve publicly funded medicare. public sector service. http://www.canada.com reports: Allowing a private, parallel medical system would inevitably undermine the quality of medicare in Canada, a federal lawyer told the Supreme Court on Tuesday.
Extractions: Monsanto Percy Schmeiser Civil society and farmers' organizations worldwide reacted with outrage to today's 5-4 decision by the Canadian Supreme Court, affirming Monsanto's right to prosecute farmers who are found to have GM crops growing on their landwhether they wanted them or not. Gene Giant Monsanto accused Saskatchewan farmers Percy and Louise Schmeiser of violating the company's patent on genetically modified canola (oilseed rape). Percy and Louise did not want Monsanto's GM canola seeds that invaded their property, and they did not try to benefit from the herbicide-tolerant trait in the GM seed (that is, they didn't spray Roundup weedkiller), but still Monsanto prosecuted them for patent infringement and demanded a portion of their income. The Schmeisers waged a courageous, 7-year battle against Monsanto that went all the way to the Supreme Court. "The good news is that the Schmeisers don't have to pay a penny to Monsanto [reversing the lower courts' ruling], but the decision has grave implications for farmers and society everywhere the Gene Giants do business," said Pat Mooney, Executive Director of ETC Group, one of the interveners in the case. Monsanto's GM seed technology accounted for over 90% of the global area planted in GM seeds last year.
The Canadian Supreme Court | Mikel.org | Michael Boyle's Weblog The canadian supreme court began hearing a case about music downloads on theinternet today. The question is whether ISPs should be responsible for the http://www.mikel.org/arch/2003/12/the_canadian_su.html
Canadian Supreme Court Strengthens Divorce Agreements Ruling sets a higher bar for determining when a court can agree to revise apreviously agreed upon divorce agreement. http://www.equityfeminism.com/archives/years/2003/000032.html
Extractions: Account Signup Canadian Supreme Court Strengthens Divorce Agreements By Brian Carnell Sunday, May 4, 2003 In a 7-2 ruling the Canadian Supreme Court reversed several lower court rulings in saying that divorce agreements should be respected unless truly unforeseen circumstances occur that require revisiting them. The case before the Court involved Linda Miglin who succeeded in having lower courts revise a divorce agreement she had reached with her husband in 1994. The Miglins owned a successful lodge in which they had capital of about $250,000. The divorce agreement called for Eric Miglin to pay his wife $60,000/year in child support, employ her for 5 years at $15,000/year as a consultant for the lodge, and swap her interest in the lodge for the family home (which was worth roughly $250,000). Eric Miglin fulfilled his obligations under the divorce agreement, but years later, apparently having difficulty finding a job, Linda Miglin asked a court to grant her $4,400 a month in spousal support even though the divorce agreement between the couple specifically ruled out any future spousal support. Linda Miglin argued that she didn't realize what she was signing away with the divorce agreement, a contention that the Supreme Court didn't lend credence given that both parties were represented by lawyers whose job it was to defend their interests.
Extractions: Ottawa, , Apr. 29 (UPI) Canada's Supreme Court agreed Thursday to hear Lego Co.'s appeal of a lower court ruling about the bumps on its plastic toy blocks. Lego said the court's decision suggests the dispute is one of a small group of "exceptional cases involving issues of national importance," the Canadian Broadcasting Corp. reported. Lego Canada and Lego holding company Kirkbi AG took Canadian toymaker Mega Blok to trial in 1996, claiming the look of Mega Blok's products infringed on Lego's trademark. They wanted an injunction and damages from Mega Blok. Lego believes it has a trademark on the look of the bumps on its blocks, although the patent expired in 1978. The company is "committed to protecting its intellectual property rights and to safeguarding the public from imitations which tend to cause confusion with consumers," general counsel Poul Hartvig Nielsen said. Suffering doesn't matter for living UK to lead E. Europe bloc in EU reform bid
Extractions: "Kevin Bourassa and Joe Varnell as the first same-sex marriage in North America propelled marriage equality in the United States as well. Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms enshrines individual liberty and protects minority rights. It is ironic that the descendants of the Monarchists that left Philadelphia in 1777 for Canada have outstripped the United States in providing equality for all its citizens."
Canadian Supreme Court Rules In Favor Of Gay Marriage TORONTO (AP) In a landmark opinion, Canadas Supreme Court said today thegovernment can redefine marriage to include same-sex couples. http://www.showmenews.com/2004/Dec/20041209News017.asp
Extractions: Best of Darkow 2004 Home Classifieds Autos ... Real Estate Departments News Business Sports For the Record ... Columnists Special Sections Our Town Special Ad Sections Special Sports Sections Search Archive ... Commercial Printing Canadian Supreme Court rules in favor of gay marriage Published Thursday, December 9, 2004 TORONTO (AP) - In a landmark opinion, Canadas Supreme Court said today the government can redefine marriage to include same-sex couples. However, the court added that religious officials cannot be forced to perform unions against their beliefs, and the legislation to allow gay marriage must still pass with a majority of the House of Commons. Canada would join Belgium and the Netherlands in allowing gay marriage if the government rules that it is legal nationwide. The courts decision brings to the final stages a long, bitter fight over whether gays and lesbians should be allowed to marry in Canada. Public opinion is evenly divided on the matter, and advocates for both sides are preparing for the final phase of the battle. Judges in six provinces and one territory have already overturned the traditional definition, allowing thousands of same-sex weddings.