This paper evaluates the current international environmental regime governing shipping through the Northwest Passage. Significant literature now exists claiming that the sole means by which to afford adequate protection for the Arctic marine environment is through a Canadian assertion of sovereignty. Historically, there have been strong challenges to Canada’s assertion of sovereignty over the waters of the Arctic Archipelago. Further, a focus on sovereignty could in fact be detrimental to the Canadian position, since it distracts from the practical issues involved in protecting the Arctic environment. Based on three primary sources of international law, namely the UN Law of the Sea Convention, the IMO Guidelines for Ships Navigating in Ice-Covered Waters and the activities of the Arctic Council, this paper argues that the current international regime provides a strong and adequate basis on which to pursue protection for the Arctic environment.

Parallel Imports refer to the legal importation of products that have some form of Intellectual Property rights attached to them. These products enter in direct competition with the products authorized for the imported market. As a result of that, Intellectual Property holders have attempted to deter these importations through the enforcement of Intellectual Property rights (such as Trademarks and Copyrights). In this work, it will be shown that Copyrights cannot be used to prevent Parallel Imports. Copyrights grant the right to reproduce works of authorship and in that form to obtain a benefit from their first sale. Copyrights do not grant protection beyond that first sale making them unsuitable to halt the importation of original products. By studying the form in which other countries have managed the Parallel Importation problem, a solution will be given to this issue.

This paper considers what the consequences should be when the right to be “tried without undue delay” is breached. The current New Zealand approach is that a stay of proceedings is a required remedy only in limited cases, and breaches can often be remedied by sentence reductions or monetary damages. This is contrasted with the Canadian Courts’ requirement that a stay of proceedings must be ordered in any case of breach. This paper explains why a stay of proceedings is not the minimum remedy, and shows how the New Zealand courts’ approval of alternative remedies aligns with the purposes and principles of constitutional remedies. It also shows that there can be both benefits and pitfalls to New Zealand courts referring to foreign judgments, and illustrates the need for the New Zealand courts to engage with theoretical principles of constitutional remedies.

This thesis considers models of approach adopted by oil producing federations in the way their constitutions regulate the control of such resources, particularly in the assignment of ownership and legislative competence to federal and sub-national authorities. I argue that any federal democratic constitution adopted in any oil rich country after 1973 is more likely to provide for an approach in favour of greater federal involvement through a central control model that vests ownership of such oil resources in the federal authority coupled with the legislative competence to regulate such resources. This is because (a.) oil is now a more lucrative commodity, (b.) the means and technology used to exploit it are now safer, more advanced and more available (c.) and because in today’s global economy, federal and national governments face more challenges and responsibilities, thus requiring access to more resources and greater flexibility to address these challenges.

This work considers the interplay between the Crown, public authorities and the class action device. The class action is a relatively recent legal innovation that allows for the collective redress of similarly situated victims through a single strand of litigation. Class actions are most commonly associated with the pursuit and remediation of corporate wrongdoing, however the Canadian government has been pursued to a significant extent as class action law has rolled out across the country. In stark contrast to commercial defendants, public authorities carry on their activities for the public good and on a not-for-profit basis. The best of intentions and a lack of profit do not imply that liability should be denied, rather that it should be managed as effectively as possible. This work examines and advocates for the careful use of various tools which limit the potential impact class action lawsuits pose to public service delivery.

This thesis considers models of approach adopted by oil producing federations in the way their constitutions regulate the control of such resources, particularly in the assignment of ownership and legislative competence to federal and sub-national authorities. I argue that any federal democratic constitution adopted in any oil rich country after 1973 is more likely to provide for an approach in favour of greater federal involvement through a central control model that vests ownership of such oil resources in the federal authority coupled with the legislative competence to regulate such resources. This is because (a.) oil is now a more lucrative commodity, (b.) the means and technology used to exploit it are now safer, more advanced and more available (c.) and because in today’s global economy, federal and national governments face more challenges and responsibilities, thus requiring access to more resources and greater flexibility to address these challenges.

This work considers the interplay between the Crown, public authorities and the class action device. The class action is a relatively recent legal innovation that allows for the collective redress of similarly situated victims through a single strand of litigation. Class actions are most commonly associated with the pursuit and remediation of corporate wrongdoing, however the Canadian government has been pursued to a significant extent as class action law has rolled out across the country. In stark contrast to commercial defendants, public authorities carry on their activities for the public good and on a not-for-profit basis. The best of intentions and a lack of profit do not imply that liability should be denied, rather that it should be managed as effectively as possible. This work examines and advocates for the careful use of various tools which limit the potential impact class action lawsuits pose to public service delivery.

Parallel Imports refer to the legal importation of products that have some form of Intellectual Property rights attached to them. These products enter in direct competition with the products authorized for the imported market. As a result of that, Intellectual Property holders have attempted to deter these importations through the enforcement of Intellectual Property rights (such as Trademarks and Copyrights). In this work, it will be shown that Copyrights cannot be used to prevent Parallel Imports. Copyrights grant the right to reproduce works of authorship and in that form to obtain a benefit from their first sale. Copyrights do not grant protection beyond that first sale making them unsuitable to halt the importation of original products. By studying the form in which other countries have managed the Parallel Importation problem, a solution will be given to this issue.

This paper considers what the consequences should be when the right to be “tried without undue delay” is breached. The current New Zealand approach is that a stay of proceedings is a required remedy only in limited cases, and breaches can often be remedied by sentence reductions or monetary damages. This is contrasted with the Canadian Courts’ requirement that a stay of proceedings must be ordered in any case of breach. This paper explains why a stay of proceedings is not the minimum remedy, and shows how the New Zealand courts’ approval of alternative remedies aligns with the purposes and principles of constitutional remedies. It also shows that there can be both benefits and pitfalls to New Zealand courts referring to foreign judgments, and illustrates the need for the New Zealand courts to engage with theoretical principles of constitutional remedies.

This paper evaluates mediation as a potential alternative strategy for resolving Canadian tax disputes with the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA). It examines the current notice of objection procedure for resolving tax disputes and reviews its challenges to achieve timeliness and high quality communication and information exchange with Canadian taxpayers. It examines mediation as an alternative dispute resolution strategy and surveys its potential benefits in the tax context. Drawing upon the experiences of the United States, United Kingdom, and Australia with tax mediation, this paper resurrects the idea, last seriously considered by the CRA in 1997, that mediation has the potential to address the deficiencies in the Canadian notice of objection process. Finally, this paper examines the constraints under which the Canada Revenue Agency operates and discusses the types of Canadian tax disputes that are, as a result, both well and ill-suited to resolution by mediation.