Edwards v. Canada (Attorney General)
Edwards v. Canada ( Attorney General ) A. C. 124 - also known as Persons' Case - is a Canadian- British court ruling that determined that women can be Canadian senators.
The case was by the Canadian Famous Five: Nellie McClung, Henrietta Muir Edwards, Emily Murphy (1868-1933), Louise McKinney and Irene Parlby, straining, the proceedings pending before the judicial committee of the Privy Council in London, at that time the highest court of appeal in Canada contributed.
Background
The decision was in a time when the women's movement had made great progress and had in most Western nations already enforced the right to vote for women. The Famous Five had begun an intensive campaign to assert that women could also be Canadian senators.
At this time, interpreted the Canadian government, in whose hands lay the appointment of senators, the Constitution Act of 1867 so that the necessary "qualified persons" ( "qualified persons" ) could only be men and women would be excluded by the Senate.
Because of the campaign presented the Canadian Minister of Justice in 1928 the Supreme Court of Canada the "reference question" whether the word "person" contained in Article 24 of the British North America Acts as " females ".
Decision of the Supreme Court of Canada
The five judges of the Federal Court ruled that section "relevant persons" is limited in this context only to men. The authored by Judge Francis Alexander Anglin decision stated that "persons", while generally quite women including, in the specific case does not.
The judge interpreted the section as it the authors of North America Acts intended in 1867. At that time it was inconceivable that women could occupy a seat in Parliament, which is supported by the use of the male personal pronoun "he" throughout the text. If the author including women would have meant as "relevant persons", they would have done that explicitly stated.
Decision of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council
The Famous Five carried the case to London before the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, then the highest court of appeal for all areas of the British Empire outside the British Isles. There, the Committee decided on 29 October 1929 that the section on the persons should be read so thoroughly that it also includes women. The decision authored John Sankey, 1st Viscount Sankey.
Living Tree Doctrine
To come to this decision, Sankey established a completely new approach, which has since become a fundamental approach of the Canadian constitutional law.
The British North America Act planted in Canada a living tree that is in a position to grow within its natural limits. The intent of the law was to give Canada a constitution. Like all written constitutions, it has evolved through usage and convention.
Their Lordships do not consider duty of this body - it's certainly not their intention - to curtail the provisions of this Act by a narrow and technical interpretation, but by a broad and liberal interpretation so that the Dominion to a great extent, albeit within certain limits, may be mistress of the house, just like the provinces to a great extent, but within certain limits, ladies of the house in their are.
The interpretation of the approach was known as " broad and liberal " interpretation of the Constitution as a Living Tree Doctrine Through this notice.
Decision
In applying the doctrine to the Persons' Case, Sankey came to the decision that the exclusion of women from public office " is a relic barbarischerer times than ours. And for those who ask why the word "person" should include women, the obvious answer is, why should not it? "
Follow
Was the decision by the Privy Council importance for the whole British Empire outside the British Isles and particularly for the Canadian women. For the question of whether women were able to sit in the British House of Lords, it had no meaning, as this was outside the jurisdiction of the Privy Council. The applicant Emily Murphy (1868-1933), which could be Senator, but failed because the Prime Minister they will continue to not want to appoint as a Senator. However, he appointed not six months after the decision with Cairine Wilson on February 15, 1930, the first woman in the Canadian Senate.
Comments
This article is based on a translation of the article en: Edwards v. Canada ( Attorney General ) in his version of the February 24, 2007