10

I haven't found any cases where this defence has worked. I strongly suspect that that's because it never has. Every piece of advice I've read on this unsurprisingly suggests you'd be a fool to attempt to rely on this defence in court, including some cases in which defendants have attempted to rely on it and have failed. There are a couple of Freedom of ...


8

No. These theories are legally unrecognisable. The concept of governance by consent is misapplied, as is the 'private corporation' nonsense; almost all of Magna Carta has been repealed; Black's is not an instrument of law and does not bind the courts. You may wish to consider the implications of discarding all statute law. The age of sexual consent, for ...


2

The main argument I've read for the Magna Carta being considered constitutional relies on two facts: The Constitution of Canada contains unwritten principles. This is made clear in many Supreme Court cases. eg. Referece re Secession of Quebec, Reference re Provincial Judges. The Preamble of the Constitution Act, 1867 establishes a "Constitution similar in ...


2

Common law, i.e. law made by judges in courts, has always been inferior to the dictations of the monarch and parliament. Courts do have some power of judicial review, but they may not usurp the authority that created them and pays the judge's paychecks. Some quotes: "The law of the land depends not upon the arbitrary will of any judge; but is permanent, ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible