First there's choosing the right law,
because the federal and provincial governments have overlapping jurisdiction over some but not all family law problems.
Not exact matches
Meanwhile, we will be bullied some more by our
federal government and neighboring
provincial government,
because we are protecting our land water
and coast.
Municipal
governments also need to be a partner with their
federal and provincial counterparts in determining immigration targets
and migration strategies,
because cities are truly where the rubber will hit the road.
Municipal operating spending has also increased
because of further downloading of responsibilities by
federal and provincial governments onto municipalities. The biggest increases in spending by municipalities over the past two decades have been for housing, health, social services
and environmentâ $» all areas where
federal and provincial governments also have responsibility, as the FCM's recent State of Canadaâ $ ™ s Cities
and Communities report demonstrated.
Because of the potential benefits of EV technology,
federal and provincial governments are implementing ambitious programs in support of EV production
and use.
(8) the points made in the conclusion are: (1) consistent with avoiding expenditures on the criminal justice system, the
federal attorney general appeared to be neglecting the plight of pre-trial inmates in custody in extremely bad jail conditions,
and the
provincial attorney general appeared to ignore the needs of prosecutors for greater resources of staff
and time in order to work adequately; (2) similarly, the other examples presented also support the proposition that the criminal justice system is inadequately resourced
because there are «no votes in justice»;
and, (3) the reduction in the safeguards against wrongful convictions caused by the radical changes in procedures made necessary
because governments do not provide adequate resources for the criminal justice system;
We say this
because the division of powers part of the judgement (commencing at para 98) is full of all sorts of references to two levels of
government (see e.g. para 141)
and similar comments about «interlocking
federal and provincial schemes» that make it abundantly clear that this Court has given no thought to the space within which indigenous laws may operate within the modern constitutional order (for recognition that the law making authority of aboriginal peoples pre-dated the Crown's acquisition of sovereignty, was not extinguished by that acquisition of sovereignty
and was not impaired by the division of legislative powers between the
federal and provincial governments in 1982 see Campbell v British Columbia (2000), 189 DLR (4th) 333 (BCSC)
and Justice Deschamps in Beckman v Little Salmon / Carmacks First Nation, [2010] 3 SCR 103 at para 97).
The reason that the line of cases has gotten so long,
and keeps getting longer, is
because Governments,
federal and provincial continue to ignore the tests set out in these decisions.
Late in 1977,
because of the «mixed» reception that the Law Reform Commission of Canada's proposal for an Evidence Code to replace the Canada Evidence Act had received nationally, the
Federal / Provincial Task Force on Uniform Rules of Evidence had been formed under the sponsorship of the Uniform Law Conference of Canada (the ULCC), which body provides the mechanisms and procedures by which federal, provincial, and territorial government lawyers work together to maintain consistency and compatibility of federal and provincia
Federal /
Provincial Task Force on Uniform Rules of Evidence had been formed under the sponsorship of the Uniform Law Conference of Canada (the ULCC), which body provides the mechanisms
and procedures by which
federal, provincial, and territorial government lawyers work together to maintain consistency and compatibility of federal and provincia
federal,
provincial,
and territorial
government lawyers work together to maintain consistency
and compatibility of
federal and provincia
federal and provincial laws.