Living tree doctrine
Judicial interpretation |
---|
Forms |
General rules of interpretation |
General theories of interpretation |
In
of constitutional interpretation that says that a constitution is organic and must be read in a broad and progressive manner so as to adapt it to the changing times.Concept
The living tree doctrine has been deeply entrenched into Canadian constitutional law since the seminal constitutional case of
The "frozen concepts" reasoning runs contrary to one of the most fundamental principles of Canadian constitutional interpretation: that our Constitution is a living tree which, by way of progressive interpretation, accommodates and addresses the realities of modern life.
Lord Sankey LC’s reference to "natural limits" did not impose an obligation to determine, in the abstract and absolutely, the core meaning of constitutional terms.[1]
However, "natural limits" cannot be granted too elastic a definition. In the
Charter
The interpretation of the
Outside Canada
This section needs expansion with: more countries. You can help by adding to it. (September 2021) |
United States
In the
United Kingdom
In a 2011 speech,
See also
- Living instrument doctrine, used by the European Court of Human Rights
- Constitutional history of Canada
- Original intent
External links
References
- Reference re Same-Sex Marriage, 2004 SCC 79at par. 22, 28, [2004] 3 SCR 698 (9 December 2004)
- ^ Marcotte v. Fédération des caisses Desjardins du Québec, 2014 SCC 57 at par. 21 (19 September 2014)
- Re B.C. Motor Vehicle Act, 1985 CanLII 81at par. 53, [1985] 2 SCR 486 (17 December 1985)
- ISSN 0307-1235. Retrieved 30 January 2019.
- ^ Hale, Brenda (16 June 2011). "Beanstalk or Living Instrument? How tall can the ECHR grow?" (PDF). UK Supreme Court.
- ^ "Lady Hale: Beanstalk or living instrument, how tall can the ECHR grow?". UKSCBlog. 17 June 2011. Retrieved 30 January 2019.