The Paul-André Crépeau Centre for Private and Comparative Law attaches great importance to developing a network for the exchange and dissemination of foundational research in private law.

To this end, it brings together scholars from near and far to participate in activities such as its continuing series of workshops, as well as conferences and colloquia.


Audrée Sirois (B.C.L./LL.B., McGill University), La discrétion du fiduciaire en contexte testamentaire - notion quasi-mythique?

Tuesday, July 31, 2018, 12:30-1:30 pm, Room 316, New Chancellor Day Hall

(In French only) Se voulant une réflexion sur un des grands concepts en droit des fiducies, cette présentation se propose d’aborder le sujet de la discrétion du fiduciaire d’un point du vue pratique et critique. La notion de discrétion dans le cadre d’une fiducie testamentaire se révèle être des plus intéressantes puisque la personne ayant accordé cette discrétion n’est plus de ce monde pour en expliquer ou contester les balises. Peut-être est-ce en raison de cette idée de « confiance » qui sous-tend la fiducie que nous acceptons aussi facilement d’accorder et d’appliquer une telle discrétion? C’est en approchant cette notion sous différents angles – l’encadrement par la Charte québécoise des droits et libertés, les normes et codes professionnels, les clauses autorisant l’empiètement du capital, ainsi que l’application de l’article 1275 du Code civil du Québec –  et à l’aide de divers exemples pratiques que nous nous questionnerons sur celle-ci.

Vanessa Di Feo (McGill University), Morgentaler: A Hollow Victory?

Thursday, August 2, 2018, 12:30-1:30 pm, Room 316, New Chancellor Day Hall

This presentation explores the legacy of the seminal 1988 R v Morgentaler decision. Although this case was lauded a victory for pro-choice activists across Canada, it is not without its flaws. Further, its legacy is questionable when we take a closer look at the state of abortion laws and health coverage in Canada (or lack thereof).

Comparative in nature, this presentation is divided into two main parts. The first part of this presentation explores the patchwork of abortion services that persists across Canada. Upon providing an overview of the fragmented 1988 Supreme Court of Canada decision, the speaker attempts to prove that the legacy of Morgentaler is, in fact, hollow through a comparative legal analysis. She does so by exploring a number of cases from various provinces, and demonstrates that even where there are victories, they are theoretical at best. This is bolstered with statistical research, which illustrates that the very state of uneven abortion access that led to the decriminalization of abortion in 1988 continues to jeopardize Canadian women’s health.

The second part of this presentation attempts to explain why the patchwork of abortion services continues to put the lives of Canadian women at risk. The speaker considers potential arguments, and ultimately criticizes Federalism and the Canada Health Act’s funding system. This is linked to the negative rights analytical framework set out in Morgentaler, which leaves women without recourse. Ultimately, the speaker explores other potential solutions to resolve the inefficiency of this framework, largely based on comparative law and solutions in various legal jurisdictions.