{"title":"2021年加拿大国际公法案例","authors":"Gib van Ert, Dahlia Shuhaibar","doi":"10.1017/cyl.2022.25","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Supreme Court of Canada heard appeals from three provincial references concerning the constitutionality of a federal statute, theGreenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act.1 The question was whether Parliament had legislative jurisdiction to enact the law or whether, instead, the law concerned matters of provincial legislative jurisdiction. Saskatchewan, Ontario, and Alberta contended that the first two parts of the Act (establishing a so-called “carbon tax” fuel charge applicable to producers, distributors, and importers and creating a pricing mechanism for industrial greenhouse gas emissions) and its four schedules impermissibly trenched on the legislative competence of the provinces. Canada contended that the Act came within Parliament’s","PeriodicalId":52441,"journal":{"name":"The Canadian yearbook of international law. Annuaire canadien de droit international","volume":"59 1","pages":"565 - 583"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Canadian Cases in Public International Law in 2021\",\"authors\":\"Gib van Ert, Dahlia Shuhaibar\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/cyl.2022.25\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The Supreme Court of Canada heard appeals from three provincial references concerning the constitutionality of a federal statute, theGreenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act.1 The question was whether Parliament had legislative jurisdiction to enact the law or whether, instead, the law concerned matters of provincial legislative jurisdiction. Saskatchewan, Ontario, and Alberta contended that the first two parts of the Act (establishing a so-called “carbon tax” fuel charge applicable to producers, distributors, and importers and creating a pricing mechanism for industrial greenhouse gas emissions) and its four schedules impermissibly trenched on the legislative competence of the provinces. Canada contended that the Act came within Parliament’s\",\"PeriodicalId\":52441,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Canadian yearbook of international law. Annuaire canadien de droit international\",\"volume\":\"59 1\",\"pages\":\"565 - 583\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Canadian yearbook of international law. Annuaire canadien de droit international\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/cyl.2022.25\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Canadian yearbook of international law. Annuaire canadien de droit international","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/cyl.2022.25","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Canadian Cases in Public International Law in 2021
The Supreme Court of Canada heard appeals from three provincial references concerning the constitutionality of a federal statute, theGreenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act.1 The question was whether Parliament had legislative jurisdiction to enact the law or whether, instead, the law concerned matters of provincial legislative jurisdiction. Saskatchewan, Ontario, and Alberta contended that the first two parts of the Act (establishing a so-called “carbon tax” fuel charge applicable to producers, distributors, and importers and creating a pricing mechanism for industrial greenhouse gas emissions) and its four schedules impermissibly trenched on the legislative competence of the provinces. Canada contended that the Act came within Parliament’s