|
''Nadan v R'' is a key ruling of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in determining the competence of the Parliament of Canada with respect to the restrictions laid out in the ''Colonial Laws Validity Act 1865'', and whether it possessed extraterritorial jurisdiction. ==Background== In 1875, the Parliament of Canada established the Supreme Court of Canada as a general court of appeal. This did not, however, bar rulings from the various provincial courts of appeal from being appealed directly to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.〔For a complete list of Canadian cases appealed to the Judicial Committee, see: List of Judicial Committee of the Privy Council cases originating in Canada.〕 In 1888, Parliament enacted a provision to abolish appeals in criminal cases to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council,〔''Criminal Procedure Amendment Act'', SC 1888, c 43, s 1〕 which was later incorporated as s 1025 of the ''Criminal Code'': In 1924, Frank Nadan, working for his employer (a British Columbia common carrier), was transporting intoxicating liquor from Alberta to Montana, which was subject to a prohibition on alcohol. Near Coleman, Alberta, he was arrested by the Alberta Provincial Police for: : * having liquor not sealed in accordance with Alberta's liquor control laws, and : * transporting liquor in a manner not allowed by the ''Canada Temperance Act''. He was convicted on both counts, and appealed these convictions to the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of Alberta. Those appeals were dismissed, but the court gave leave to appeal to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. The respondent presented a petition to the Council, asking that the appeals be quashed because they were barred under s. 1025. Leave was granted for the attorneys-general of Alberta and Canada to intervene. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Nadan v R」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|