LEGISLATIVE HISTORY AND THE WHEAT BOARD CASE
AbstractThis article advances the proposition that the Privy Council’s decision in the Wheat Board case was incongruous with the intention of the National Emergency Transitional Ash, Stuart CPowers Act. The author analyses that case to illustrate that the miscarriage was attributable to the Privy Council’s refusal to consider the legislative history of the Act. He advocates the tradition in American federal courts of making full use of the legislative history, urging re-examination of the practice precluding such examination in Canada.
Download data is not yet available.