Les impasses théoriques et pratiques du contrôle de constitutionnalité canadien (Constitutional Review in Canada: Theoretical and Practical Impasses)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
French abstract: Ce texte propose, dans un premier temps, une nouvelle lecture du regime de l’article 52 de la Loi constitutionnelle de 1982. Il avance que l’effet juridique de cette disposition depend du type d’inconstitutionnalite en cause. D’une part, le paragraphe 52(1) regit les conflits de fond entre les normes constitutionnelle et ordinaire en sanctionnant d’inoperabilite la mesure legislative incompatible avec la loi supreme. D’autre part, le paragraphe 52(3) exige l'observance des regles procedurales inscrites dans la Constitution. Les lois contrevenant a ce critere procedural sont frappees de nullite pour cause d’exces de pouvoir. Dans un second temps, ce texte tente d’expliquer les effets de la declaration d’inconstitutionnalite a l’egard des tiers et dans le temps. Il maintient que le jugement declaratoire d’inconstitutionnalite vaut in rem de maniere a lier tant les parties au litige que les tiers par application la res judicata, sous reserve de rares exceptions. La portee generale des declarations d’inconstitutionnalite permet aux tribunaux d’amenager l’effet de la loi jugee inconstitutionnelle dans le temps afin, notamment, de maintenir la securite et la stabilite des rapports juridiques. English abstract: This article proposes a new interpretation of section 52 of the Constitution Act, 1982. It argues that the legal effect of this provision depends on the type of unconstitutionality at issue. On the one hand, subsection 52(1) governs substantive conflicts between constitutional and legislative norms by rendering inoperative legislation that is incompatible with the supreme law. On the other hand, subsection 52(3) requires the observance of the procedural rules prescribed by the Constitution. Legislative measures that contravene this procedural criterion are ultra vires and, as a result, invalid. This article further attempts to clarify the effects of declarations of unconstitutionality on third parties as well as their temporal operation. It contends that declaratory judgments of unconstitutionality are in rem in nature. Such declarations bind parties to the litigation and third parties alike by virtue of the principle of res judicata, subject to rare exceptions. The general scope of declarations of unconstitutionality allows courts to adjust the temporal operation of the law deemed unconstitutional, notably to maintain the security and stability of legal relationships.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".