British Columbia (Attorney General) v. Christie

British Columbia (Attorney General) v. Christie

There is no general constitutional right to counsel in all court or tribunal proceedings affecting rights and obligations; the constitutional text, jurisprudence and historical understanding of the rule of law do not support constitutionally mandating state-funded legal services across the board; provinces retain authority under s. 92(14) to regulate access to courts, and the impugned 7% legal services tax is constitutional insofar as it does not contravene an established case-specific constitutional right to counsel.

Citation
2007 SCC 21
Parties
Appellant / Respondent on Cross Appeal: Attorney General of British Columbia; Respondent / Appellant on Cross Appeal: Dugald E. Christie; Intervener: Attorney General of Canada; Intervener: Attorney General of Ontario; Intervener: Attorney General of Quebec; Intervener: Attorney General of New Brunswick; Intervener: Attorney General of Manitoba; Intervener: Attorney General of Prince Edward Island; Intervener: Attorney General for Saskatchewan; Intervener: Canadian Bar Association; Intervener: Law Society of British Columbia
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
25 May 2007
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Law — Challenge to Provincial Taxation / Access to Justice / Appeal and Cross Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada — Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; cross-appeal dismissed; impugned legislation upheld as constitutional
Legal Topics
Access to Justice, Right to Counsel, Rule of Law, Provincial Taxation, Legal Services Tax, Charter Rights
Source Language
English
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Taxation Access to Justice Right to Counsel Rule of Law Provincial Taxation Legal Services Tax +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Attorney General of British Columbia

Appellant / Respondent on Cross Appeal

Dugald E. Christie

Respondent / Appellant on Cross Appeal

Attorney General of Canada

Intervener

Attorney General of Ontario

Intervener

Attorney General of Quebec

Intervener

Attorney General of New Brunswick

Intervener

Attorney General of Manitoba

Intervener

Attorney General of Prince Edward Island

Intervener

Attorney General for Saskatchewan

Intervener

Canadian Bar Association

Intervener

Law Society of British Columbia

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Law — Challenge to Provincial Taxation / Access to Justice / Appeal and Cross Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada — Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the provincial 7% legal services tax infringes the right to access to justice for low-income persons
  2. 2 Whether there exists a general constitutional right to counsel in court or tribunal proceedings dealing with a person’s rights and obligations
  3. 3 Whether the rule of law or the constitutional text implies a broad right to state-funded legal services

Ratio Decidendi

There is no general constitutional right to counsel in all court or tribunal proceedings affecting rights and obligations; the constitutional text, jurisprudence and historical understanding of the rule of law do not support constitutionally mandating state-funded legal services across the board; provinces retain authority under s. 92(14) to regulate access to courts, and the impugned 7% legal services tax is constitutional insofar as it does not contravene an established case-specific constitutional right to counsel.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; cross-appeal dismissed; impugned legislation upheld as constitutional

Orders

  • Appeal allowed and cross-appeal dismissed
  • No costs