▁status , ▁powers ▁and ▁rights ". ▁Patrick ▁Ta illon , ▁a ▁professor ▁of ▁constitution al ▁rights ▁at ▁L aval ▁University , ▁wrote ▁in ▁Le ▁De voir ▁that ▁he ▁also ▁felt ▁the ▁alter ations ▁to ▁the ▁succession ▁should ▁trigger ▁Section ▁ 4 1 ▁of ▁the ▁Constitution ▁Act , ▁ 1 9 8 2 , ▁and ▁argued ▁that ▁certain ▁laws ▁related ▁to ▁the ▁structures ▁of ▁the ▁state ▁were ▁" const itution al ised " ▁by ▁the ▁patri ation ▁of ▁the ▁constitution , ▁despite ▁not ▁being ▁listed ▁in ▁section ▁ 5 2 ( 2 ) ▁of ▁the ▁Constitution ▁Act , ▁ 1 9 8 2 ; ▁the ▁Supreme ▁Court ▁Act , ▁for ▁example . ▁ ▁Anne ▁Tw ome y ▁of ▁the ▁University ▁of ▁Sydney ▁also ▁all ud ed ▁to ▁Canada ▁having ▁its ▁own ▁laws ▁of ▁royal ▁succession ▁separate ▁from ▁those ▁of ▁the ▁UK ▁when ▁she ▁spec ulated ▁in ▁a ▁paper ▁on ▁the ▁matter ▁of ▁succession ▁changes ▁that ▁" no ▁United ▁Kingdom ▁law ▁changing ▁the ▁law ▁of ▁succession ▁could ▁extend ▁to ▁Canada " ▁and ▁"[ i ] f , ▁for ▁example , ▁Prince ▁William ▁had ▁a ▁first ▁born ▁daughter ▁and ▁a ▁second ▁born ▁son , ▁it ▁is ▁conce iv able ▁that ▁if ▁the ▁United ▁Kingdom ▁changed ▁its ▁law ▁of ▁succession ▁and ▁Canada ▁did ▁not , ▁the ▁daughter ▁would ▁become ▁Queen ▁of ▁the ▁United ▁Kingdom ▁and ▁the ▁son ▁would ▁become ▁King ▁of ▁Canada ." ▁Tw ome y ▁later ▁highlight ed ▁the ▁fact ▁that ▁Canada ▁is ▁not ▁included ▁among ▁the ▁territ ories ▁the ▁British ▁bill ▁lists ▁as ▁being ▁affected