Diverging from the Russell and Hodge cases we looked at last time, in the 1920s Lord Haldane made a series of judgements that viewed the powers given to the federal and provincial governments in s91 and s92 as “watertight compartments” where little or no overlap may exist. I disscuss the Snider case as an early example of this view. Then we’ll look at some of the discussion and criticism that occurred as a result of the stance taken by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.

Toronto Electric Commissioners v Snider (1925)
AG Canada v AG Alberta (the insurance reference) (1916)
Montreal v Montreal Street Railway (1912)

 
icon for podpress  Standard Podcast [18:04m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download