The “baby royal” in front of the Court of appeal

Kathleen Frenette

Tuesday, February 20, 2018 00:11

UPDATE
Tuesday, February 20, 2018 00:11

Look at this article

The Court of appeal heard yesterday, the case on the succession to the british throne first rejected, in February 2016, by a judge of the superior Court.

It was two years ago, judge Claude Bouchard ruled that Ottawa had the right to give its agreement to the modification in the british aimed to modernise the rules of succession to the throne.

However, according to Patrick Taillon, and Geneviève Motard, since Canada is a sovereign country ” to have repatriated its constitution “, it should obtain the consent of the provinces because it is a change to the Constitution of Canada.

The two lawyers to the origin of the legal proceedings wished therefore to declare unconstitutional the canadian law of 2013 on the succession to the throne. This request was dismissed by the magistrate.

Breach of the independence

For the appellants, ” the judgment is breach of the independence of Canada and its Constitution, the first judge who concluded to the existence of a royal succession hereditary determined by the United Kingdom and, therefore, the automatic application of the changes foreseen by the british act of 2013 in Canada.”

Conversely, the attorney general of Canada is of the opinion that the judge of first instance has not committed any error and, in addition, he has ” grasped the scope of the principle according to which the Queen (or King) of Canada is in fact and law a person who is, according to the rules of succession established from time to time by the Parliament of the United Kingdom, the Queen (or King) of the United Kingdom “.

According to them, this principle is implemented by “a rule of automatic recognition” which does not contravene in nothing ” the principle of the independence of Canada “.