Contemporary Canadian Business Law 12th Edition by John A Willes solution manual

 
Case 2
FM 96 Tiger Radio wanted to set up a three-day live remote event in a provincial park for the Labour Day weekend. The provincial parks commission approved the plan, subject to a payment of $4,100, comprised of a park event permit ($1,000), a sanitation charge ($1,000), a broadcasting permit ($500), a beer/wine premises special occasion permit ($1,500), and a fire inspection fee for the beer/wine consumption premises ($100). How should FM 96 respond to the provincial commission?
 
Answer:
By requiring an application fee or fee for service, and issuing a permit to allow a particular activity, the provincial authority is setting conditions or “regulating” that behavior.  All of the activities in the park that are listed are matters that a province can regulate, except broadcasting.  The regulation of broadcasting is a federal matter, and ultra vires of provincial jurisdiction.  The province has no right to demand this payment, and its “permit” is meaningless.
Case 3
In the year 1619, Maxwell was drunk, lost control of his horse and killed a child. No legal action was taken by the Crown. In the year 1859, Edward purposely drove his master’s wagon over a man in the street.  He was executed for his crime.  In the year 1959, Sharon was sober, lost control of her car and killed a child. She was given a suspended sentence and ordered to pay a $100 fine, and was sued by the child’s parents for damages of $1000 in funeral costs. In the year 2019, Karl was drunk, lost control of his car and killed a child. He was given one year imprisonment, a $1000 fine, a lifetime driver’s licence suspension and was sued for $2.5 million for emotional distress by the parents of the child.
 
In what way is the principle of stare decisis at work here, if at all?
 
Answer:
The principle of stare decisis is at work, despite the fact that the penalty has evolved over time.  Recalling that one of the strengths of the principle is that it can respond to the norms of a changing society, the fact remains that causing death is wrong, and will attract a socially appropriate penalty.  Each epoch of our society has had different conceptions of capacity, incapacity, and degrees of responsibility and liability in the operation of a mode of transport.