Talk:List of Canadian constitutional documents

Canada: Law High‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Canadian law.

Lists Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Dividing the list[edit]

As I understand it there are a number of the Acts do not fall within the definition of s. 52(2), so aren't part of the constitution today. Perhaps we should divide the list into current constitutional documents and past/defunct constitutional documents. --PullUpYourSocks 13:50, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Has List of documents from the constitutional history of Canada completely slipped your mind? CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 19:08, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, yes. In fact, it did slip my mind. So then, is this list only documents that fall within the meaning of s.52(2)? I haven't spent any time to figure it out myself so I may be wrong, but I had imagined the list would be smaller than this. -PullUpYourSocks 02:36, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure how either list was complied, but section 52 doesn't list anything. It just mentions a schedule that contains the list, but this is not it. I think the official list doesn't include anything before 1867- the Royal Proclamation and Quebec Act aren't on it for example. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 02:41, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think it does include documents that are pre-1867, and much more than the Act of Settlement, as per section 129 of the BNA, 1867. No provincial or Dominion act can repeal or contradict an act of the British parliament. This was true until 1931 when the UK then gave up the right to legislate for Canada with the Statute of Westminster as well as permitting Dominion and provincial laws to contradict British laws.

For instance, the notion that public law is common, not civil, law in Quebec was established in the Quebec Act and has not been mentioned since, yet it is still cited as valid constitutional law (probably per section 129 of the BNA). This is the case because later British acts did not repeal the Quebec Act in full (few laws fully replace previous laws) and certain provisions remain law. The question is whether, because of the above process, is it now just statutory law or has it acquired the aura of constitutional entrenchment (likely through subject matter provisions for amendment in the Canada Act, 1982).

All told this was a very messy way to create a constitution. You really need a constitutional expert to compile a list of extant laws which form part of Canada's constitution. -- G. Csikos, 30 April 2007

House of Commons apportionment[edit]

Under "Amendments using the 1982 amending formula":

Wasn't there recently an amendment to the HoC apportionment formula in the Constitution Act 1867?--Bancki (talk) 18:37, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of Canadian constitutional documents. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130614215631/http://senparlvu.parl.gc.ca/Guide.aspx?viewmode=4&categoryid=-1&eventid=8763&Language=E to http://senparlvu.parl.gc.ca/Guide.aspx?viewmode=4&categoryid=-1&eventid=8763&Language=E

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:53, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"judicial interpretation of constitutional provisions"[edit]

How does that "entrench" anything? 216.8.170.66 (talk) 21:01, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Access forbidden![edit]

Clicking on several of the links to pdf files where one is supposed to be able to read the acts of legislation referred to, I get a message that says "Access forbidden! You don't have permission to access the requested object. It is either read-protected or not readable by the server." Michael Hardy (talk) 01:11, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]