The Rule Against Abstract Claims: A Critical Perspective on US Jurisprudence

C.I.P.R., Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 3-30, 2010

30 Pages Posted: 11 Mar 2011 Last revised: 29 Jan 2012

See all articles by Norman Siebrasse

Norman Siebrasse

University of New Brunswick - Fredericton - Faculty of Law

Date Written: February 13, 2011

Abstract

The US approach to the rule against abstract claims is important both because Canadian courts are willing to consider foreign law as persuasive authority, and because the US Supreme Court has provided a clearly articulated rationale for the rule. In this article I argue that the US doctrine is inconsistent with Canadian law, and that none of the rationales offered by the US Supreme Court to support its approach are sound. The Canadian position, in contrast, is supported by a compelling policy rationale. Consequently, US Supreme Court jurisprudence should not be followed by Canadian courts.

Suggested Citation

Siebrasse, Norman, The Rule Against Abstract Claims: A Critical Perspective on US Jurisprudence (February 13, 2011). C.I.P.R., Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 3-30, 2010. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1782747 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1782747

Norman Siebrasse (Contact Author)

University of New Brunswick - Fredericton - Faculty of Law ( email )

P.O. Box 4400
Fredericton, New Brunswick E3B 5A3
Canada
506-453-4725 (Phone)
506-453-4548 (Fax)

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
133
Abstract Views
1,303
rank
217,368
PlumX Metrics