Lawyers who fought top court ap­point­ment seek com­pen­sa­tion

The Guardian (Charlottetown) - - PROVINCE -

TORONTO — The lawyers who chal­lenged the Harper govern­ment’s ul­ti­mately aborted ap­point­ment of Marc Nadon to the Supreme Court of Canada go be­fore a court on Mon­day to ar­gue they should be fully re­im­bursed for their ef­forts. In fil­ings with the Fed­eral Court of Ap­peal, Rocco Galati ar­gues he de­serves to be com­pen­sated for what he calls his “ex­cep­tional” bat­tle to de­fend the in­tegrity of the coun­try’s Con­sti­tu­tion and ju­di­cial sys­tem. Cit­i­zens have a con­sti­tu­tional en­ti­tle­ment to le­gal-cost awards if they suc­cess­fully chal­lenge leg­is­la­tion or govern­ment ac­tion that goes to the “ar­chi­tec­ture of the Con­sti­tu­tion” and where they de­rive no per­sonal ben­e­fit, Galati says. Deny­ing an award in such cir­cum­stances would amount to a “de­nial to the con­sti­tu­tional right not only to a fair and in­de­pen­dent ju­di­ciary but also ac­cess to a fair and in­de­pen­dent ju­di­ciary,” he ar­gues.

A high-pro­file mem­ber of Canada’s Syr­ian com­mu­nity says Fri­day night’s pep­per spray­ing of Syr­ian refugees at a wel­come event in Van­cou­ver was likely a one-off event and doesn’t re­flect how the ma­jor­ity of Cana­di­ans view the newly ar­rived mi­grants.

Tima Kurdi — the aunt of three-year-old Alan Kurdi, who drowned while flee­ing civil strife in Syria — says the sup­port Cana­di­ans have shown to refugees is “un­be­liev­able” and they shouldn’t be blamed for

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada

© PressReader. All rights reserved.