Apr. 2, 2012 - Creatures of Statute

Creatures of Statute
In R. v. Greenbaum, 1993 CanLII 166 (SCC), [1993] 1 SCR 674 the Supreme Court of Canada states:

Municipalities are entirely the creatures of provincial statutes and can therefore exercise only those powers which are explicitly conferred on them by provincial statute.….Courts must be vigilant, however, in ensuring that municipalities do not impinge upon the civil or common law rights of citizens in passing ultra vires by‑laws. (emphasis mine)

Can we say that "Humans are creatures of statutes and have only those powers conferred on them by statutes"? NO! In fact the oposite is true. Humans are created by God and can exercise all the inalienable rights conferred upon them by God. 

The case of R. v. Cole (1982) ONDC 37 O.R. (2d) 144 is powerful, therein we read:

It is not for this Court to assume that fictitious persons are included in the definition of ‘person’ in s. 361, simply because Parliament must have intended that without so saying. ...If Parliament had intended that word to include fictitious person, as I find on the facts that Kenneth Lane is, then it would have said so.

In most every federal and provincial statute person is defined as, "person includes a corporation" or something similar to this.

"If Parliament had intended that word [person] to include [natural personal and/or human]… then it would have said so."

Humans are ultra vires to statutes, except by consent, but we are none the less expected to "To live honourably; to hurt nobody; to render to everyone his due"(maxim of law)!

Use what you read here as a part of your research to establish your understanding.
Your actions remain your responsibility.
All natural rights reserved. © 2012 steven, a man. <><