Attorney General of Canada v. The Reader's Digest Association (Canada) Ltd., Sélection du Reader's Digest (Canada) Ltée

Attorney General of Canada v. The Reader's Digest Association (Canada) Ltd., Sélection du Reader's Digest (Canada) Ltée

The Supreme Court held that the trial judge correctly excluded the ministerial statements, press materials and Hansard as inadmissible extrinsic evidence in an inter partes constitutional challenge; the question of a statute's validity is resolved by its pith and substance and practical effect, not by subjective or extrinsic statements of ministers or parliamentary debate.

Citation
[1961] SCR 775
Parties
Defendant/appellant: Attorney General of Canada; Plaintiff/respondent: The Reader's Digest Association (Canada) Ltd., Sélection du Reader's Digest (Canada) Ltée
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
3 October 1961
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Challenge to Federal Excise Tax (part Ii, Excise Tax Act) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Queen's Bench (appeal Side) on Admissibility of Interlocutory Evidentiary Rulings
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment of Court of Queen's Bench (Appeal Side) set aside; interlocutory rulings of the Superior Court restored; record returned to Superior Court; costs awarded to appellant in this Court and in the Court of Queen's Bench.
Legal Topics
Excise Tax, Ultra Vires, Pith and Substance, Extrinsic Evidence, Admissibility of Parliamentary Materials
Source Language
English
Taxation Constitutional Law Federalism Evidence Law Excise Tax Ultra Vires Pith and Substance Extrinsic Evidence +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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Attorney General of Canada

Defendant/appellant

The Reader's Digest Association (Canada) Ltd., Sélection du Reader's Digest (Canada) Ltée

Plaintiff/respondent

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Challenge to Federal Excise Tax (part Ii, Excise Tax Act) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Queen's Bench (appeal Side) on Admissibility of Interlocutory Evidentiary Rulings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether statements by Ministers, press releases and Hansard are admissible extrinsic evidence in an inter partes constitutional challenge to legislation
  2. 2 Whether the 1956 amendment to the Excise Tax Act (Part II) was in pith and substance a law relating to property and civil rights (provincial jurisdiction)
  3. 3 Whether reports of royal commissions or similar materials may be admitted to show what was before Parliament when enacting legislation

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that the trial judge correctly excluded the ministerial statements, press materials and Hansard as inadmissible extrinsic evidence in an inter partes constitutional challenge; the question of a statute's validity is resolved by its pith and substance and practical effect, not by subjective or extrinsic statements of ministers or parliamentary debate.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment of Court of Queen's Bench (Appeal Side) set aside; interlocutory rulings of the Superior Court restored; record returned to Superior Court; costs awarded to appellant in this Court and in the Court of Queen's Bench.

Orders

  • Allow appeal
  • Set aside judgment of Court of Queen's Bench (Appeal Side)