Canadian Bijuralism: A Conversation of Cultures

Canada's legal culture is a mixed legal culture, encompassing both the common law tradition inherited from England, and the civil law tradition, which connects Canada to its roots in Continental Europe. This mixed legal culture has come to be known as bijuralism. Inevitably, the presence of two legal cultures or traditions on Canadian soil means that they often come into contact with one another; the interaction of concepts, values and practices expressed in each of those legal traditions results in a true conversation of cultures. I will suggest that broader insight can be drawn from the conversation of Canada's legal cultures, insight that may be helpful in other contexts in which a plurality of cultures or systems of values and norms interact in a sustained manner, within a single space. I begin by explaining how Canada came to encompass both the civil and common law traditions and how Canada's federal system affects the conversation between these legal cultures. I will then consider the three possible modes of interaction that are possible where legal traditions, cultures, religions, or any other set of norms and values coexist, wrestle or clash in the same space: denial of plurality, which leads to the silencing of the minority tradition; acknowledgement of plurality, which requires one to create a space for each tradition; and embracing plurality, which treats the conversation of cultures less as a challenge than as a gift. I will examine how patterns reflecting each of these modes of interaction have repeated themselves, concluding that despite the unquestionable challenges posed by plurality, there is hope for a fruitful embrace of competing visions which must surely yield better self-knowledge and peaceful coexistence. Canada's Experience of Bijuralism The Roots of Bijuralism in Canada The common and civil law traditions can be distinguished generally on the basis of a few defining characteristics. Historically, the civil law tradition arose in Continental Europe, and traces its origins back to a revival of Roman law that took place between the twelfth and sixteenth centuries. It is characterised by a faith in written law, often manifest in the presence of a Civil Code, in which ordinary rules relating to family, property, contracts and wrongdoings, successions and other such topics - the rules of private law - are expressed in general language, arranged systematically. It is a legal tradition that accords primacy to the sovereign in the act of stating the law (Watkin 1999). As a result, judges in civil law countries typically deny that they are making law when they decide cases. By way of contrast, the common law tradition finds its roots in Great Britain in the eleventh century (Belanger-Hardy and Grenon 1997). It underlies the legal systems of the United Kingdom and the United States, as well as Commonwealth countries around the world. It is characterised by the special authority given to concepts and principles developed over time by judges deciding particular cases and, as a result, by the emphasis on unwritten law and incremental conceptions of the quest for justice (Glenn 2004). While problems in the two legal traditions often reach very similar solutions, one can see from this brief sketch that they operate under very different assumptions about, among other things, the role of legislatures, the role of judges, and the optimal mode of expression of legal norms. Civil law and common law are different legal cultures in that sense. They are two different languages which communicate differently within the law. How is it, then, that Canada came to house these two Western legal cultures? The early history of Canada, as is well known, is a mixture of settlement and conquest. In a land occupied by our First Nations, portions of Canada were settled by British subjects, who were presumed to have brought the common law tradition with them (Hogg 2002). However, what is now referred to as Central Canada was originally settled by the French, who established the civil law Custom of Paris as the principal set of legal norms in New France (Dickinson 2001). …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.