Positive Obligations Under Sections 15 and 7 of the Charter: A Comment on Gosselin V. Quebec

Supreme Court Law Review, Vol. 20, pp. 66-91, 2003

28 Pages Posted: 15 May 2010

See all articles by Jamie Cameron

Jamie Cameron

York University - Osgoode Hall Law School

Date Written: 2003

Abstract

The Supreme Court has not been hesitant to recognize positive rights and impose positive obligations under the Charter. Though the judges are aware of limits on their powers of review, the question of institutional boundaries has played a minor role in this jurisprudence. It is the merits of claims, rather than doubts about the legitimacy of review, that determine the outcome in these cases. Gosselin v. Quebec, which tested the constitutionality of Quebec's welfare policy, provides a recent example of the Court's tendency to subordinate institutional considerations to the question of entitlement. The purpose of this article is to explain why the Court's avoidance of the question of institutional boundaries is problematic.

Keywords: instutional boundaries, Gosselin v. Quebec, Candian Charter, positive rights, positive obligations

JEL Classification: K3, K33

Suggested Citation

Cameron, Jamie, Positive Obligations Under Sections 15 and 7 of the Charter: A Comment on Gosselin V. Quebec (2003). Supreme Court Law Review, Vol. 20, pp. 66-91, 2003. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1604730

Jamie Cameron (Contact Author)

York University - Osgoode Hall Law School ( email )

4700 Keele Street
Toronto, Ontario M3J 1P3
Canada

Here is the Coronavirus
related research on SSRN

Paper statistics

Downloads
130
Abstract Views
578
rank
235,006
PlumX Metrics