Question 1 (1 point)

Saved

When interpreting words in a statute, the starting point is:

Question 1 options:

a)	The ordinary or plain meaning

b)	The constitutional meaning

c)	The disputed meaning

d)	The technical meaning

Question 2 (1 point)

Saved

When there is a discrepancy between the English and French versions of a federal statute, the courts will look for:

Question 2 options:

a)	The translated meaning

b)	The shared meaning

c)	The presumed meaning

d)	The reasonable meaning

Question 3 (1 point)

Saved

In the Harvard mouse case, the Supreme Court favoured a static interpretation of the word "invention" because:

Question 3 options:

a)	Mice are not inventions

b)	The statute was ambiguous

c)	Parliament could not have contemplated the patenting of higher life forms

d)	Harvard did not invent the mouse

Question 4 (1 point)

Saved

In applying the various rules of statutory interpretation, courts strive to arrive at:

Question 4 options:

a)	An objective meaning

b)	A plausible meaning

c)	A common sense meaning

d)	A dictionary meaning

Question 5 (2 points)

Saved

Select all that apply. The modern principle of statutory interpretation emphasizes:

Question 5 options:

a)	The entire context

b)	How a reasonable person would interpret the law

c)	The grammatical and ordinary sense of words

d)	The intention of Parliament

Question 6 (1 point)

Saved

Select all that apply. A statute applying to the "sun, moon and other large objects" would likely apply to:

Question 6 options:

a)	The CN tower

b)	A satellite

c)	An elephant

d)

Jupiter

Question 7 (1 point)

Saved

A statute applying to "automobiles, trucks, tractors, motorcycles, and other motor-powered vehicles" would likely apply to:

Question 7 options:

a)

Bicycles

b)

Snowplows

c)	Motorboats

d)

Airplanes

Question 8 (1 point)

Saved

The Vabalis case was an example of a court doing what to a law?

Question 8 options:

a)	Reading down

b)	Reading in

c)	Not reading

d)	Reading out

Question 9 (2 points)

Saved

Select all that apply. Courts will presume that laws are intended to comply with:

Question 9 options:

a)	International law

b)	The Constitution

c)	Related legislation

d)	The common law

Question 10 (2 points)

Saved

Select all that apply. Courts will presume that laws are not intended to do the following, unless they are express:

Question 10 options:

a)	Apply retroactively

b)	Apply absurdly or irrationally

c)	Apply outside of Canada

d)	Apply to the Crown

Question 11 (1 point)

Saved

The McIntosh case concerned the difference between:

Question 11 options:

a)	Common law and statutory interpretations

b)	Constitutional and unconstitutional interpretations

c)	Textual and intentional interpretations

d)	Static and dynamic interpretations

Question 12 (1 point)

Saved

Statutory interpretation is best described as:

Question 12 options:

a)	About compliance with the Constitution

b)	About discovering the intentions of Parliament

c)	About the appropriate institutional roles of the legislative and judicial branches of government

d)	About the dictionary definitions of words

Submit Quiz12 of 12 questions saved