Abstract
Environmental organizations have experienced a string of recent courtroom successes enforcing the federal Species At Risk Act. This case comment examines one of these cases, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans v. David Suzuki Foundation (“Killer Whales”), to expose the rule-of-law underpinnings of the Federal Court of Appeal’s decision. It argues that, while the decision is on its face an ostensible victory for endangered species protection, the conception of the rule of law on which the court relies is incapable of providing meaningful legal constraints for much environmental decision-making.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 57-78 |
Journal | Journal of Environmental Law and Practice |
Volume | 27 |
Issue number | 1 |
Publication status | Published - 2014 |