RésuméLa catégorisation, bien que primordiale au raisonnement juridique, est un aspect sous-théorisé du droit, particulièrement dans les systèmes de droit commun. Cet article décrit deux théories de catégorisation utilisées par la législation canadienne régissant l'usage des chèques. Les règles de droit régissant l'usage des chèques ordinaires sont d'application connue et relativement prévisible. Toutefois, lorsque appliquées à des catégories spécifiques de chèques – chèques certifiés, post-dates et double-dates – les mêmes règles offrent des résultats forts imprévisibles. Selon l'auteur, ces disparités résultent de la théorie de catégorisation mise en place par la Loi sur les lettres de change, principale source de droit en la matière. Cette loi présume que la notion de chèque peut être définie in abstracto, en référence à une liste exhaustive de critères établis. Toutefois, cette théorie ne peut expliquer les pratiques du droit corporatif et du droit de la consommation. Une théorie de catégorisation faisant usage de prototypes est nécessaire pour expliquer ces disparités: ce sont des elaborations systématiques et cohérentes du modèle central qui ne sont ni arbitraires, car définies par le prototype, ni prévisibles. La théorie de catégorisation proposée par la loi voile la complexité et la fluidité d'une catégorie en apparence simple, soit les chèques. Une théorie prototype de catégorisation, au contraire, permet d'expliquer à la fois la structure de la catégorie, ainsi que ses disparités, et les causes du non-déterminisme de la loi.
This chapter reviews property law theory and its literature that aims to show how developments in general property theory may be relevant for energy and natural resources. It focuses on liberal Western understandings of property, and primarily those within the common law tradition. The chapter is organized as follows. Section I takes a broad look at the literature addressing the question of ‘what is property?’ and the issues raised by that question. It discusses a number of conceptualist and instrumentalist approaches to the matter of definition, looks briefly at the issue of commodification, and examines the literature on the categories of property. It concludes with a consideration of the numerous clauses principle. Section II addresses the problem of justifying property, or at least private property. It outlines the various explanations, dividing them into four types: the labour, desert, first possession (or occupation), and economic theories; personhood theories; liberty-based theories; and pluralist theories. It then looks at explanations for the movement of property from one category to another. The section concludes with a study of the justifications for (private) property as applied to the issue of expropriation.
This chapter examines the distinctive nature of academic integrity in graduate legal education in Canada, a nature rooted in the fact that almost all graduate students in law have practiced law. I consider the general acceptance of the unattributed copying of others’ writing within the legal profession and the judiciary, contrasting that tolerance―even approval―with the unsympathetic reception given the same practices in the academy. I then turn to graduate legal education in common law Canada and the diversity among graduate students in law, including significant differences in their undergraduate legal education. Then, because many of the graduate students who have practiced outside Canada want to be admitted to practice law in Canada, I look at the impact that academic misconduct may have on their ability to be admitted to practice. In order to do so, I review all published Canadian court and tribunal admission decisions that considered academic misconduct committed while in law school. Lastly, in light of unique challenges of graduate legal education, I offer some suggestions for preventing academic misconduct and facilitating students’ engagement with their own scholarship.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.