| Summary: | Since the entrance of the colony to the French normative model (1664) then British (1763), the Canadian jurists tried to resist an application of standards unsuitable for the context of the colony. If, during New-France colony, the magistrates and the administrators make act of a felted resistance, the solicitors will act in practice so as to escape with care of the British standards at the time of the Conquest. As such, New-France’s law is founded on a reflection of the shifting desire and the legal culture of local jurists, and at times on the willingness and expectations of the metropolis’ administration. This discourse usually consists of a distorted image of the reality of what should be, or rather what could be, colonial law. Conversely, the various discussions on the law which emanate from practicians, magistrates, and administrators of the colony demonstrate strong concern for adaptation, a genuine flexibility and a longing to elevate colonial law to a greater degree of efficiency, thereby gradually distinguishing it from its metropolitan model. The Conquest provided Quebec law with the opportunity to acquire autonomy while impressing the necessity to establish legal roots on a civil foundation inspired by Paris custom. After the English conquest, justice and English lawyers lead a wrestling to adapt or resist to certain French legal techniques, but they are, at the same moment, the founders of the mixed character of the Quebecois private law.
|
|---|