Talk:Anglin Court

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Anglin Court article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Canada: Law Low‑importance

Canada
portal

WikiProject
Canada

Canada
notice board

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by WikiProject Canadian law.

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is written in Canadian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, centre, travelled, realize, analyze) and some terms may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. You can locate your hook here. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by HurricaneZeta (talk) 16:26, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that the Anglin Court did not believe women were "persons"?

Source: Reference re Meaning of the Word "Persons" in s. 24 of the BNA Act, 1928 CanLII 55, [1928] SCR 276; ...a unanimous Court held that women were not "qualified persons" for the purpose of being appointed to the Senate of Canada. The Court maintained that it was for the legislature to make such a change (Snell & Vaughan 1985, p. 141.).

ALT1: ... that the Anglin Court was created because the alternative Chief Justice candidates did not want the job, were too old, or drunk? Source: Eugène Lafleur declined the appointment (Snell & Vaughan 1985, p. 123); John Idington, whose declining mental capacity led to his eventual removal in 1927 (Snell & Vaughan 1985, p. 122.) "Idington had been described by the prime minister as 'senile.'" (Snell & Vaughan 1985, p. 126.); Lyman Duff: "Second, and probably more important, Duff had a drinking problem, and perhaps had even become an alcoholic. All of the specific evidence of his heavy drinking comes from the early 1920s, and it may be that his resort to alcohol was a by-product of his nervous exhaustion at the end of the war." (Snell & Vaughan 1985, p. 122.)
Reviewed:
Comment: The Persons Case is likely the most notable decision of the early Supreme Court of Canada, and the SCC's decision was overturned by Lord Sankey at the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.

Created by Caddyshack01 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

Caddyshack01 (talk) 11:42, 6 November 2025 (UTC).[reply]

Article is in good condition without evidenceo f copyvio - good work on writing on a relatively poorly covered field (Canadian judicial history) on here. The ALT0 hook seems to check out from the quoted source. No QPQ needed, so all is good to go. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 04:28, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]