About: R v Coote

Facets (new session)
Description
Metadata
Settings
- Rule:
- Inverse Functional Properties:
- "Same As":

About: R v Coote Goto Sponge NotDistinct Permalink

An Entity of Type : dbo:SupremeCourtOfTheUnitedStatesCase, within Data Space : dbpedia.demo.openlinksw.com associated with source document(s)
QRcode icon

http://dbpedia.demo.openlinksw.com/describe/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdbpedia.org%2Fresource%2FR_v_Coote

R v Coote is a Canadian constitutional law decision dealing with the powers of the provinces under the British North America Act, 1867 (now the Constitution Act, 1867). The point in issue was whether Quebec had the constitutional authority to create a mandatory inquiry power for provincial fire commissioners. The case was ultimately decided by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, at that time the court of last resort for Canada within the British Empire. It was the first decision by the Judicial Committee analysing the division of powers under the Constitution of Canada.

Attributes	Values
rdf:type	yago:Abstraction100002137 yago:Case107308889 yago:Event100029378 yago:Happening107283608 yago:PsychologicalFeature100023100 yago:YagoPermanentlyLocatedEntity Supreme Court of the United States case
rdfs:label	R v Coote (en)
rdfs:comment	R v Coote is a Canadian constitutional law decision dealing with the powers of the provinces under the British North America Act, 1867 (now the Constitution Act, 1867). The point in issue was whether Quebec had the constitutional authority to create a mandatory inquiry power for provincial fire commissioners. The case was ultimately decided by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, at that time the court of last resort for Canada within the British Empire. It was the first decision by the Judicial Committee analysing the division of powers under the Constitution of Canada. (en)
name	R v Coote (en)
foaf:depiction
dcterms:subject	1873 in Canadian case law Canadian federalism case law Canadian constitutional case law Judicial Committee of the Privy Council cases on appeal from Canada
Wikipage page ID	33645345 (xsd:integer)
Wikipage revision ID	1116069517 (xsd:integer)
Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage	Canadian constitutional law 1873 in Canadian case law Quebec Quebec Court of Appeal Barnes Peacock Judicial Committee of the Privy Council John Burgess Karslake Constitution Act, 1867 Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Montague Edward Smith Westmount, Quebec Constitution of Canada British Empire Canadian federalism case law Canadian constitutional case law James William Colvile Judicial Committee of the Privy Council cases on appeal from Canada Supreme Court of Canada George Mellish Arson Ex parte Robert P Collier Division of powers Court of last resort
sameAs	R v Coote R v Coote R v Coote
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate	dbt:Reflist dbt:Rp dbt:Short_description dbt:Use_Canadian_English dbt:Use_mdy_dates dbt:Infobox_court_case
thumbnail	wiki-commons:Special:FilePath/British_North_America_Act,_1867.jpg?width=300
caption	R v Coote was the first decision of the Judicial Committee interpreting the British North America Act, 1867 (en)
citations	9 (xsd:integer) 17 (xsd:integer) (en) LR 4 PC 599 (en) [1873] UKPC 26 (en)
court	Judicial Committee of the Privy Council
full name	Our Sovereign Lady the Queen v Edward Coote (en)
italic title	Yes (en)
judges	Barnes Peacock Montague Edward Smith James William Colvile George Mellish Robert P Collier (en)
keywords	Provincial inquiry power; Admissibility of depositions (en)
has abstract	R v Coote is a Canadian constitutional law decision dealing with the powers of the provinces under the British North America Act, 1867 (now the Constitution Act, 1867). The point in issue was whether Quebec had the constitutional authority to create a mandatory inquiry power for provincial fire commissioners. The case was ultimately decided by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, at that time the court of last resort for Canada within the British Empire. It was the first decision by the Judicial Committee analysing the division of powers under the Constitution of Canada. The Judicial Committee held that the mandatory inquiry power was within provincial authority. The Judicial Committee also held that evidence given by an individual in response to a mandatory inquiry could later be used as evidence against that individual in a criminal prosecution for arson. (en)
appealed from	Quebec Court of Appeal
date decided	1873-03-18 (xsd:date)
decision by	Sir Robert P. Collier (en)
number of judges	5 (xsd:integer)
opinions	Provincial statute authorising inquiries by fire commissioners within provincial authority. Statements could be used in criminal prosecution. (en)
gold:hypernym	Decision
prov:wasDerivedFrom	wikipedia-en:R_v_Coote?oldid=1116069517&ns=0
page length (characters) of wiki page	8710 (xsd:nonNegativeInteger)
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf	wikipedia-en:R_v_Coote
is Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage of	Robert Collier, 1st Baron Monkswell L'Union St Jacques de Montreal v Bélisle R. v. Coote
is Wikipage redirect of	R. v. Coote
is foaf:primaryTopic of	wikipedia-en:R_v_Coote

Faceted Search & Find service v1.17_git139 as of Feb 29 2024

Alternative Linked Data Documents: ODE Content Formats:

RDF

ODATA

Microdata

About

OpenLink Virtuoso version 08.03.3330 as of Mar 19 2024, on Linux (x86_64-generic-linux-glibc212), Single-Server Edition (378 GB total memory, 59 GB memory in use)
Data on this page belongs to its respective rights holders.
Virtuoso Faceted Browser Copyright © 2009-2024 OpenLink Software