Bedford v. Canada (Attorney General)

Bedford v. Canada (Attorney General)

Intervention to raise a new s.15 Charter challenge on appeal was denied because the record was not developed with that issue in mind, the appellants credibly demonstrated the record would be incomplete for s.15/s.1 analysis, and allowing the new ground at this stage would be unfair and likely cause delay; intervention was not required to be granted for the argument about morals-driven objectives because that issue is already before the court and the moving party may join an existing intervener group instead.

Citation
2011 ONCA 209
Parties
Applicants (respondents in Appeal): Terri Jean Bedford, Amy Lebovitch and Valerie Scott; Respondent (appellant in Appeal): Attorney General of Canada; Intervener (appellant in Appeal): Attorney General of Ontario; Proposed Intervener (moving Party): Maggie’s: The Toronto Sex Workers’ Action Project
Court
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
16 March 2011
Procedural Posture
Appeal of Constitutional Challenge to Criminal Code Provisions / Interlocutory Motion to Intervene in Court of Appeal (in Chambers)
Outcome
Motion partly dismissed: leave to intervene to raise s.15 denied; moving party may participate by joining an existing intervener group to address remaining issues; no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
Charter S.15 Equality, Charter S.7 Life Liberty Security, Charter S.2(b) Freedom of Expression, Charter S.1 Justification, Intervention as Friend of the Court, Prostitution Related Offences
Source Language
English
Constitutional Law Criminal Law Administrative/procedural Law Charter S.15 Equality Charter S.7 Life Liberty Security Charter S.2(b) Freedom of Expression Charter S.1 Justification Intervention as Friend of the Court +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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Terri Jean Bedford, Amy Lebovitch and Valerie Scott

Applicants (respondents in Appeal)

Attorney General of Canada

Respondent (appellant in Appeal)

Attorney General of Ontario

Intervener (appellant in Appeal)

Maggie’s: The Toronto Sex Workers’ Action Project

Proposed Intervener (moving Party)

Procedural Posture

Appeal of Constitutional Challenge to Criminal Code Provisions / Interlocutory Motion to Intervene in Court of Appeal (in Chambers)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a proposed intervener may raise a new s.15 Charter challenge on appeal
  2. 2 Whether the moving party may argue that the impugned provisions are driven by moral views as an impermissible legislative objective
  3. 3 Whether the existing record is sufficient for a s.15 analysis

Ratio Decidendi

Intervention to raise a new s.15 Charter challenge on appeal was denied because the record was not developed with that issue in mind, the appellants credibly demonstrated the record would be incomplete for s.15/s.1 analysis, and allowing the new ground at this stage would be unfair and likely cause delay; intervention was not required to be granted for the argument about morals-driven objectives because that issue is already before the court and the moving party may join an existing intervener group instead.

Court Disposition

Motion partly dismissed: leave to intervene to raise s.15 denied; moving party may participate by joining an existing intervener group to address remaining issues; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • Motion for leave to intervene to raise s.15 dismissed.
  • Moving party permitted to join one of the existing intervener groups to address the argument that the legislation is driven by moral views.