|
PUIL - General. International Air Transport Association v. Canada (Transportation Agency) [summary]
In International Air Transport Association v. Canada (Transportation Agency) (SCC, 2024) the Supreme Court of Canada dismissed an appeal, here involving "the vires of the Air Passenger Protection Regulations, SOR/2019-150 (“Regulations”) [SS: under the 'Canada Transportation Act'], and the nature and scope of the “exclusivity principle” set out in Article 29 of the 1999 Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air" [SS: the 'Montreal Convention'].
Here the court distinguished 'foreign law' (domestic law of foreign states) from 'international law' [public international law (PUIL)(eg. treaties) and private international law (PRIL) (private law between parties in different countries):[65] In the course of dealing with state practice, the Federal Court of Appeal and the parties addressed the admissibility of expert evidence regarding international law. Before I address this, I would note an important distinction between foreign law and international law. Foreign law is the domestic law of other states (Hunt v. T&N plc, 1993 CanLII 43 (SCC), [1993] 4 S.C.R. 289, at pp. 308-9). International law is “the law among states, but it is also a body of law enunciating certain rights and obligations that states have vis-à-vis non-state actors (such as individuals, international organizations, and other entities) and, to a more limited extent, imposing certain obligations on non-state actors in areas of concern to the international community” (J. H. Currie et al., International Law: Doctrine, Practice, and Theory (3rd ed. 2022), at p. 14). Foreign law is treated as a question of fact that has to be pleaded and proved, generally by way of expert evidence (Nevsun Resources Ltd. v. Araya, 2020 SCC 5, [2020] 1 S.C.R. 166, at para. 97). International law is treated as a question of law. As I explain below, the admissibility of expert evidence concerning international law depends on the same legal criteria as the admissibility of expert evidence in any other area of Canadian law.
|
