Countries that have a domestic final appellate court have established a judicial institution over which they have control as part of the policymaking governing structure and how they view other existing and emerging extraterritorial courts will be influenced by their perception of the court and the role it will play when the policies of the governing coalition are challenged. This book analyzes that phenomenon in terms of the broader construction and understanding of the state in the era of international law, legal tribunals, and globalization. By zooming in on the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC), an ancient colonial court, Harold Young examines how the Caribbean Community, specifically, the 15 former British colonies comprising the Caribbean Basin are navigating their changing political environments and transitioning to its own extraterritorial court, the Caribbean Court of Justice. Using historical reviews, descriptive analyses, and statistical methodologies Young finds that the choice to retain the JCPC at independence is influenced by the colonial experience, the length of colonial rule, and how deeply embedded the JCPC is on the governing structures of the new state.

The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC) is the court of final appeal for jurisdictions including the British Overseas Territories and Crown Dependencies, and for those Commonwealth countries that have retained the appeal to Her Majesty in Council. This volume aims to explain the JCPC's unique procedures, practices, and, where relevant, jurisprudence in a manner which is readily accessible, even to those unfamiliar with it. It will provide valuable guidance to practitioners considering whether to seek recourse to the JCPC and, if an appeal is pursued, throughout the appeal process. This comprehensive guide to the JCPC is the first work of its kind since 1937. It includes chapters on jurisdiction, conditions of appeal, precedent, and the JCPC's role in interpreting constitutions as part of a workload which still ranges from death row criminal cases to heavy commercial disputes. Importantly, the authors provide detailed commentary on the complex Rules and Practice Directions that underwent a significant overhaul in 2009, for which no dedicated volume currently exists. Emphasis is placed on topics of greatest practical importance to litigants, including timings, the form and content of written cases, issues of costs, and the role of the Registrar. This one-stop reference is essential for any practitioner in the countries for which the JCPC remains the final court of appeal, as well as for UK solicitors acting as local counsel and members of the UK Bar instructed in JCPC appeals. It also provides students and academics with chapters on the history, jurisprudence, and the sources of law considered by the JCPC, as well as on its interaction with other court systems. The release of this work is particularly timely given that in the judgment Willers v Gubayi [2016] UKSC 44 the UK Supreme Court explained for the first time the circumstances in which the JCPC may bind the Courts of England and Wales. With authoritative authorship and unique content, this is a must-have resource for all those pursuing a case before, or with an interest in, the JCPC.

On 18 October 1929, John Sankey, England's reform-minded Lord Chancellor, ruled in the Persons case that women were eligible for appointment to Canada's Senate. Initiated by Edmonton judge Emily Murphy and four other activist women, the Persons case challenged the exclusion of women from Canada's upper house and the idea that the meaning of the constitution could not change with time. The Persons Case considers the case in its political and social context and examines the lives of the key players: Emily Murphy, Nellie McClung, and the other members of the "famous five," the politicians who opposed the appointment of women, the lawyers who argued the case, and the judges who decided it. Robert J. Sharpe and Patricia I. McMahon examine the Persons case as a pivotal moment in the struggle for women's rights and as one of the most important constitutional decisions in Canadian history. Lord Sankey's decision overruled the Supreme Court of Canada's judgment that the courts could not depart from the original intent of the framers of Canada's constitution in 1867. Describing the constitution as a "living tree," the decision led to a reassessment of the nature of the constitution itself. After the Persons case, it could no longer be viewed as fixed and unalterable, but had to be treated as a document that, in the words of Sankey, was in "a continuous process of evolution." The Persons Case is a comprehensive study of this important event, examining the case itself, the ruling of the Privy Council, and the profound affect that it had on women's rights and the constitutional history of Canada.

In this study, W. J. Waluchow argues that debates between defenders and critics of constitutional bills of rights presuppose that constitutions are more or less rigid entities. Within such a conception, constitutions aspire to establish stable, fixed points of agreement and pre-commitment, which defenders consider to be possible and desirable, while critics deem impossible and undesirable. Drawing on reflections about the nature of law, constitutions, the common law, and what it is to be a democratic representative, Waluchow urges a different theory of bills of rights that is flexible and adaptable. Adopting such a theory enables one not only to answer to critics' most serious challenges, but also to appreciate the role that a bill of rights, interpreted and enforced by unelected judges, can sensibly play in a constitutional democracy.

Comprehensive, ambitious, and detailed, The Lawmakers will be the definitive work on the evolution of the law of Canadian federalism.

Capital punishment is a debate that grips civil society anew with every incidence of homicide. The cry from a majority of stakeholders is a desperate plea to enforce the death penalty which has been derogated by the courts, at home and abroad. The abatement of capital punishment takes place amidst a tidal wave of unrelenting crimes against the person, namely murder. The branches of government seem bereft at best to provide a remedy and at worse unable to enforce the law as it relates capital punishment in the Bahamas. Added to this is an uneasy public whose trust in the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government is noticeably waning. Additionally, outside forces, led by abolitionists, are bearing down on the Bahamas with a view of nudging the nation and the Caribbean into an era of life imprisonment for murder as opposed to death by hanging as its penalty. Toote sets forth these issues with striking clarity, offering practical remedies to help settle the controversy surrounding the death penalty in the Bahamas and the Caribbean. 'Capital Punishment in the Bahamas and the Caribbean' in light of the Privy Council's moratorium is required reading for all who desire an appreciation of the subject of capital punishment, including students, religious leaders and professionals in the legal arena.

This is a vital study of the motivations of the British Imperial Appeal Courts and the tensions between the demands of imperial law and justice and those of African law and custom. Examining the central role of the Privy Council and the Courts, it reveals the impact of the colonized peoples in shaping the processes and outcomes of imperial justice.