THE COURT is the online resource for debate & data about the Supreme Court of Canada.*

Archive For Entries On Charter of Rights and Freedoms

Golan v. Holder: Should the US be Singing a New Copyright Tune?

One night, you could listen to Sergei Prokofiev’s “Peter and the Wolf” with your friends, remix it with another tune and then pen a bestselling book titled Peter and the Wolf and Zombies. That would all change in 1994 with the signing of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act, a trade agreement that restored the copyright [...]

Crookes v Newton: Hyperlinking, Defamation Law, and Freedom of Expression on the Internet

On October 17, 2011, the Supreme Court of Canada released its landmark decision in Crookes v. Newton, 2011 SCC 47, affirming 2009 BCCA 392 and 2008 BCSC 1424. At issue was whether creating an internet hyperlink to defamatory material constitutes “publication” of the material for the purposes of defamation law. The case challenged the Court [...]

Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission v. William Whatcott, et al. (2010), currently before the SCC

Before being born again, Bill Whatcott had it rough: by 14 he was living on the streets, selling himself to older men to survive, sniffing glue to get by. His religious rebirth transformed him into an outspoken member of the Christian Truth Activists. The religious teachings he chooses to preach in this new life do [...]

Defining the ‘Meaningful’ – Collective Bargaining and Freedom of Association (Ontario (Attorney General) v. Fraser) Part III

In April, the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) handed down its latest pronouncement on the relationship between the Charter’s guarantee to freedom of association and the collective bargaining process in Ontario (AG) v. Fraser (Fraser). In Fraser, a majority of the Court determined that Ontario’s Agricultural Employees’ Protection Act (AEPA) is consistent with the Charter’s s. 2(d) guarantee [...]

Part II: Reece v. Edmonton: What a 36-Year Old Elephant Teaches Us About Our Relationship to Animals, and to Our Government

Last week, TheCourt.ca glossed a case heard at the Alberta Court of Appeal, which essentially blocks animal activists from seeking a court declaration that the City of Edmonton is mistreating Lucy, the lone elephant in the zoo. Justice Slatter, with Justice Costigan concurring, penned the reasons for judgment of the majority of the bench. The [...]

The Dialogue Between Courts and Legislatures: A New Era?

In 1997 and again in 2007, Peter Hogg and Allison Bushell wrote about the benefits of the dialogue between Canadian courts and legislatures. This concept has been somewhat of a hallmark of Canadian jurisprudence, especially in the era of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. However, recent statements made by the Canadian Bar Association [...]

The Métis and Section 15: The Political Game of Cultural Line-Drawing in Alberta v. Cunningham

On July 21, 2011, the Supreme Court of Canada handed down its decision in Alberta v. Cunningham. Our senior contributing editor Joseph Marcus discussed the case earlier this week. Given the significance of this case, and its contribution to the section 15(2) jurisprudence, guest contributor Marina Chernenko provides some additional analysis about the decision’s implications. [...]

Alberta v. Cunningham: The Substantive Power of Section 15(2)

Earlier this summer, Chief Justice McLachlin, for a unanimous Supreme Court of Canada, rejected a constitutional equality claim brought by a group of claimants from the Peavine Métis Settlement in Alberta. The decision offers a particularly powerful demonstration of how ss. 15(1) and 15(2) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms work together to [...]

Same-Sex Marriage: Remembering Halpern v. Canada

It is, in all likelihood, a coincidence that the anniversary of Halpern v. Canada (2002) comes on the heels of Toronto’s annual gay pride festival, but the timing is impeccable. On July 12, 2002, Justice LaForme, for a unanimous Ontario Superior Court of Justice, released a landmark decision that would pave the way towards gay [...]

What would Madison think of video games?

During a November oral argument about a California law that would restrict minors from buying violent video games, Justices Antonin Scalia and Samuel A. Alito squared off on constitutional originalism. These two United States Supreme Court justices debated whether the ratifiers of the First Amendment would have included portrayals of violence in video games as [...]