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

University of Alberta 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)

University of Alberta Faculty of Law ( email )

Law Centre (111 - 89 Ave)
University of Alberta
Edmonton, Alberta T6G 2H5
Canada

Here is the Coronavirus
related research on SSRN

Paper statistics

Downloads
49
Abstract Views
469
PlumX Metrics