https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292478 After the Statute of Westminster, 1931, the Canadian Parliament had competence to bar special leave to appeal to the Privy Council in criminal matters because the Dominion legislature possessed plenary authority within its sphere and the former Imperial-law restraints no longer applied. The power to regulate the criminal appeal system extended by necessary intendment to abolish or limit such appeals, even without express words displacing the prerogative. The earlier Nadan reasoning was confined to the now-removed objections of repugnancy to Imperial enactments and extra-territorial operation, so the impugned provision was valid and the petition failed on the preliminary objection. en-us Thu, 06 Jun 1935 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 25 Dec 2020 13:30:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292478 After the Statute of Westminster, 1931, the Canadian Parliament had competence to bar special leave to appeal to the Privy Council in criminal matters because the Dominion legislature possessed plenary authority within its sphere and the former Imperial-law restraints no longer applied. The power to regulate the criminal appeal system extended by necessary intendment to abolish or limit such appeals, even without express words displacing the prerogative. The earlier Nadan reasoning was confined to the now-removed objections of repugnancy to Imperial enactments and extra-territorial operation, so the impugned provision was valid and the petition failed on the preliminary objection. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 06 Jun 1935 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292478