2 Reads
Canadian bijuralism denotes the coexistence of two private law systems in Canada: the civil law in Quebec and the common law in the other provinces. From this legal duality, which dates back to the Quebec Act, 1774, follows a special interaction between federal legislation and provincial private law. This interaction is based on the principle of complementarity where the concepts, rules, and principles of the private law of the provinces are used to apply the federal norm. This interaction is put aside where rules of private law are expressly created to express the federal norm; in this case, there is dissociation with the private law of the provinces. Tax legislation is not exempt from this rule. Both linguistic versions must apply coherently and equitably in the two private law systems throughout Canada. This undertaking poses a major challenge considering that, in addition to the notable differences between the civil law and common law traditions, there may be major differences between the laws of the various common law provinces that result from variations in provincial legislation. The objective of harmonization is to build bridges between Canada's two legal traditions. Harmonization thus aims to ensure the compatibility and applicability of federal legislation in each of the two legal traditions and official languages through the use and acceptance of concepts and institutions from the civil law and the common law, as well as the use of the appropriate terminology to refer to those concepts and institutions. Clearly an important step in achieving this objective is the addition of sections 8.1 and 8.2 of the Interpretation Act. While section 8.1 recognizes Canadian bijuralism and expressly enshrines the principle of complementarity between federal legislation and the provincial private law in force at the time the enactment is being applied, section 8.2 facilitates comprehension of bijural enactments. * Marc Cuerrier is senior general counsel, Bijuralism and Drafting Support Services Group, Department of Justice; Sandra Hassan is senior counsel, Bijuralism and Drafting Support Services Group, Department of Justice; and Marie-Claude Gaudreault is legal counsel, Bijuralism and Drafting Support Services Group, Department of Justice. We wish to thank André Ouellette, Martin Lamoureux, and all other members of the tax law team of the Bijuralism and Drafting Support Services Group for their invaluable assistance with research and the revision of this paper. The opinions expressed are our own and do not necessarily correspond to the position of the Department of Justice on any of the issues.