Background & purpose of the system 1 basic institutions, processes, and players 3
Download 217.64 Kb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- The Presbyterian Church of Sudan et al. v. Talisman Energy Inc. and The Republic of the Sudan
What is Pluralism?Ethical Lawyering in a Global Community (Farrow) Pluralism has become an increasingly dominant force in terms of how lawyers can and should understand their professional roles Two key elements of pluralism for Farrow: The increasing diversity of clients (largely the result of globalization) this aspect of pluralism tracks the increasing diversity of Canada’s pop. An increasing societal diversity brings with it an increasing pluralism of norms, rules, practices and expectations that guide the relationships and affairs of an increasingly diverse pop. For lawyers this means that we must now understand and actively embrace plurality of our clients and their norms, practices etc. in order to properly, and competently serve them (RPC) Doing otherwise would ignore the full range of needs of many of our clients The Presbyterian Church of Sudan et al. v. Talisman Energy Inc. and The Republic of the SudanFacts: Plaintiffs allege that defendants collaborated to commit gross human rights violations, including extrajudicial killing, forcible displacement, war crimes, confiscation and destruction of property, kidnapping, rape, and enslavement. Talisman moved to dismiss on the basis of forum non conveniens Reasons: While Canadian courts may be fair and impartial, there are aspects of the substantive law which would be applied in Canadian courts which make Canada an inadequate alternative forum. an Alberta court would, prima facie,apply the lex loci delicti, or the law of the place where the activity occurred. In this case, that would mean that the Alberta court would apply Sudanese, Shari'a law. Under Sudanese law, plaintiffs as non-Muslims would enjoy greatly reduced rights. Given this fact, it is difficult to see how a Canadian court applying Shari'a law would be a great improvement over a Sudanese court applying Shari'a law Canadian Supreme Court has held that domestic law could be applied instead of international law to avoid injustice, that court also held that it envisioned "few cases where this would be necessary.” Even if a Canadian Court would apply domestic law the concern is that the causes of action available do not reflect the gravity of the alleged offenses, and in particular, the universally-condemned nature of these acts. Because this treatment fails to recognize the gravity of plaintiffs' allegations, the Court questions whether Canadian courts (in either Alberta or Ontario) would be an adequate alternative Download 217.64 Kb. Share with your friends:
|