Legal Wit — Legislation roasting on an open fire

Legal Wit — Legislation roasting on an open fire
It is for the courts to interpret the law and not to make it. The people elect their members to Parliament and to the Legislatures to make the laws under which they are to live; not the Queen's judges. To "make law" or "to appear to make law" in any manner in a constitutional case would put upon the court in the eyes of Canadians the image of partisanship and gone would be the cold impartiality which Canadians expect the court to display towards the contending governments. It is not for a court, for example, to pull hot legislative nuts, which the legislative branch of government on the grounds of expedience or policy or some other reason does not wish to legislate upon, out of the political fire for the benefit of or to assist the said legislative branch. A court that does so, like the cat in Aesop's Fable of "The Monkey, the Cat and the Chestnuts", will, in common parlance, "burn its paws"; and in so doing will act in breach of the fundamental principle of separation between the legislative and judicial branches of government.

1975 CarswellSask 57

Central Canada Potash Co. v. Saskatchewan

Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench
© Copyright WestlawNext Canada, Thomson Reuters Canada Limited. All rights reserved.