Tranchemontagne and the Administration of Rights: Lessons from the Game of Jurisdiction

22 Pages Posted: 9 Mar 2018

See all articles by Jennifer Raso

Jennifer Raso

McGill University, Faculty of Law

Date Written: December 30, 2016

Abstract

This article demonstrates how the game of jurisdiction analogy, drawn from sociolegal studies, illuminates the ways in which administrative agencies with concurrent jurisdiction over rights claims actively narrow their own ability to resolve rights claims, even as they appear to outsiders to be the passive victims of jurisdiction. By analyzing the administrative aftermath that followed the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Tranchemontagne v Ontario, including the fate of human rights claims at the Social Benefits Tribunal, this article shows how administrative tribunals may resolve conflicting logics of efficiency and accessibility to ultimately undermine their concurrent jurisdiction over human rights claims, with dire consequences for social assistance recipients.

Suggested Citation

Raso, Jennifer, Tranchemontagne and the Administration of Rights: Lessons from the Game of Jurisdiction (December 30, 2016). Journal of Law & Equality, Vol. 13, 2017, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3131296

Jennifer Raso (Contact Author)

McGill University, Faculty of Law ( email )

3644 Peel Street
Room 506
Montreal, Quebec H3A 1W9
Canada

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
110
Abstract Views
805
Rank
466,570
PlumX Metrics